A-92-46
7-8-3
United States
Environmental l^rotectton
Agency
Office ot Air (Duality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
EPA-453/R-93-040
November 1993
& EPA
INTERIM ENABLING GUIDANCE
FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART E
-------
-------
ENABLING GUIDANCE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF
40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART E
VERSION I
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission Standards Division
Durham, North Carolina
November 1993
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE. DOCUMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DISCLAIMER
ACRONYMS
EVALUATION FORM
1.0 Introduction - Why Enabling Guidance?
1.1 History of NESHAP Delegation
1.2 Delegation under the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990
1.3 Scope and Content of this Document
1.4 Intended use of this Document
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Overview of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart E
2.1 Overview of Subpart E Approval Options
2.1.1 Adjusting a Federal section 112 rule
2.1.2 Substituting a State rule or authorities
for a Federal section 112 rule
2.1.3 Substituting a generic State program for
section 112 emission standards
2.1.4 Additional Criteria for Approval of an
accidental release prevention program
under section 112(r)
2.2 Considerations in submitting a request for
approval under Subpart E
2o3 The Subpart E approval process
Roles and Responsibilities
3.1 State and Local Agencies
3„2 Regional Offices
3.3 EPA Headquarters Office
Section 63.91 of Subpart E: Common Elements of
Subpart E Reviews
4.1 Procedural Requirements
4.2 General Approval Criteria
4.3 Authority Conferred and Not Conferred by
Delegation
4.4 Concurrent Federal Authority
Adoption of unchanged Federal standards
5.1 Before Part 70 Approval and non-part 70 sources
5.1.1 Procedural Requirements . .
5.1.2 Approval Criteria
5.1.2.a Automatic Delegation
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
5.2
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
5.1.2. b Adoption by Reference
5.1.2.C Program for Case-by-Case Delegation
5.1.3 Option for Direct Final Rulemaking
5.1.4 Option for Implementation Agreements
Relationship to Part 70 Program Approval
6.0 Section 63.92 of Subpart E: Approval for Adjustments
to a Federal section 112 rule
6.1 Procedural Requirements
6.2 Approval Criteria
7.0 Section 63.93 of Subpart E: Approvals for State rules
or State authorities which substitute for a Federal
section 112 rule
7.1 Procedural Requirements
7.2 Approval Criteria under section 63.93
7.3 Detailed Demonstration
7.3.1 Level of Control
7.3.2 Minimum Compliance Provisions for detailed
demonstrations
7.4 State Authorities
7o4«l Detailed Demonstration of State Authority
8.0 Section 63.94 of Subpart Es Approval of a generic
State program which substitutes for some or all Federal
section 112 emission standards
8.1 Procedural Requirements
8.2 Approval Criteria under section 63.94
8.3 Form of the Standard
8.3.1 How does a State demonstrate a no less
stringent level of control in the "form
of the Federal standard"?
8.3.2 How does a State demonstrate a no less
stringent.compliance measure in the
form of the Federal standard"?
9.0 Section 63.95 of Subpart E:
Accidental Release Program
9.1 Procedural requirements
9.2 Approval Criteria
Approval of a State
10oO Periodic Review
[To be added in next version]
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Timeline for delegation of section 112
standard as promulgated
Timeline for section 63.92 approvals
Timeline for section 63.93 and section 63.94
approvals
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
APPENDICES
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Flow Diagram of Administrative Procedures for
Delegation under subpart E
Major Dates in the subpart E Approval
Timeline
Participants in the subpart E Approval
Process
A
B
C
D
E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Definitions
List of Headquarters Reviewing Offices
Subpart E rule [Federal register to be
added]
Statutory Language of 112(1)
Application Forms and Regional Checklist
Application Form
Regional Checklist
Various State and Regional Communication
Governor's Letter
Attorney General's Letter
Sample Regional Approval/Disapproval
for Completeness Review
Guidance on Federal Register Notices
Sample Federal Register Notice
announcing Public Comment
Sample Final Approval/Disapproval
Letter
Sample Federal Register announcing
Final Delegation
[To be added in next version]
References
4
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
PREFACE
This document is intended primarily for use by State and
local agencies submitting Subpart E applications as well as the
EPA Regional Offices who will be processing Subpart E
applications. This first version should clarify typical
questions regarding Subpart E implementation, and should help
facilitate the submittal and approval process. As we learn more
through the actual process, this document will be revised
accordingly.
The content of this document is intended to supplement
guidance provided in the rulemaking entitled, "Approval of State
Programs and Delegation of Federal Authorities" (40 CFR Part 63,
Subpart E) by providing additional information regarding how to
implement the rulemaking. This rule will be referred to as
Subpart E throughout this guidance document. It is assumed that
the reader has read Subpart E in its entirety and has a general
understanding of the rulemaking. It is hoped that this document
becomes an evolving, "living document" that will experience
continuous improvement through the fine tuning of the Subpart E
approval process.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This document was prepared by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Emission Standards Division (BSD). This
project was directed by Sheila Milliken and Tim Ream of the
Pollutant Assessment Branch within BSD and included input from
numerous State and local agency representatives including: Don
Theiler (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources), Robert Todd
(Texas Air Control Board), Karen Olsen (Texas Air Control Board),
Bliss Higgins (Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality),
Henry Naour (Illinois Environmental Protection Agency), Robert
Colby (Chattanooga-Hamilton Co., TN), Robert Fletcher (California
Air Resources Board), Elizabeth Hendersen (State of Minnesota),
Richard Valentinetti (State of Vermont), and William Becker
(STAPPA/ALAPCO).
Numerous EPA Regional Office representatives also provided
input including: Janet Beloin (Region I), Umesh Dholokia
(Region II), Bob Bennelly (Region II), Theresa Dougherty
(Region III), Jim Baker (Region III), Joseph Kunz (Region III),
Alice Chow (Region III), Isreal Milner (Region III), Stewart
Perry (Region IV), Anthony Toney (Region IV), Gary Galezian
(Region V), Camille Szematowicz (Region V), David Kee (Region V),
Bill Wagner (Region V), Bruce Varner (Region V), Donna Asenzi
(Region VI), Tanya Murray (Region VI), John Hepola (Region VI),
Tom Driscoll (Region VI), Jo Ann Heiman (Region VII), Regina
Spindler (Region IX), and David Bray (Region X).
In addition, several EPA Headquarters representatives
contributed to the project including: Tim Smith (PAB), Julie
Andresen (PAB), Dianne Byrne (PAB), Karen Blanchard (PAB), Kirt
Cox (AQMD), Rich Damberg (BSD), Kathy Kaufman (PAB), Bruce Jordan
(BSD), Michele Dubow (SDB), Tom Lahre (PAB), Randy McDonald
(CPB), Michele McKeever (BSD), Leo Stander (AQMD), Ray Vogel
(AQMD), Mike Trutna (AQMD), Nadine Shear (PAB), Tim Mohin (PAB),
Rick Mattick (PAB), David Painter (ISB), Beverly Updike (OCM),
Bill Houck (OPMO), Judy Tracy (OGC), Adan Schwartz (OGC), Sherry
Haller-Feaster (OPAR), Mary Greene (CEPP), Andrew Otis (OPPE),
Jackie Souzon (OGC), Elise Hoerath (OE), and Jane Engert (SSCD)
The EPA would also like to thank any individuals who were
not included in this section, but have offered their input into
this project over the last year.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
DISCLAIMER
This document refers to several Federal regulations that
have not been finalized. The reader should keep in mind that
once these Federal rules are finalized some of the references in
this document may not be accurate. Since this guidance document
is intended to be a "living" document, the references will be
updated to be consistent with the final Federal regulations in
future versions of this guidance document.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
ACRONYMS
ARP Accidental Release Prevention Program
The Act Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
CEPP Office of Chemical Emergency Preparedness Prevention
GEMS Continuous Emission Monitoring System
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
GACT Generally Available Control Technology
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
HQ EPA Headquarters Office
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants
NSPS New Source Performance Standard
NSR New Source Review
OAP Office of Atmospheric Programs
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OE Office of Enforcement
OGC Office of General Counsel
OPPE Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation
RA Regional Administrator
RMP Risk management plan
8
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
RO
SIP
SSCD
EPA Regional Office
State Implementation Plan
Stationary Source Compliance Division
9
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Evaluation Form
Please take a few minutes to provide us with your thoughts
about this document. Comments will be taken into consideration in
future versions of this document.
I. Please rate the usefulness of each chapter of the Enabling
Guidance listed below. Use a 1 to 5 scale where 1 denotes not
useful, and 5 denotes very useful.
Chapter 1 - Introduction - Why issue Enabling Guidance?
Chapter 2 - Overview of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart E
.— Chapter 3 - Roles and Responsibilities
_ Chapter 4 - Common Elements of Subpart E Reviews
Chapter 5 - Adoption of Unchanged Federal Standards
Chapter 6 - §63.92 - Approval of Adjustments
Chapter 7 - §63.93 - Approval of State Rules or Authorities
Chapter 8 - §63.94 - Approval of a Generic State Program
Chapter 9 - §63.95 - Approval of a State Accidental Release
Program
Chapter 10 - Periodic Review
Appendices
Tables
Figures
II. Please rate the Subpart E Enabling Guidance on the following.
Use a 1 to 5 scale where 1 denotes not useful, and 5 denotes
very useful.
Overall Usefulness
Organization
Content
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Evaluation Form
III. How can the Subpart E Enabling Guidance be improved? (Please
provide attachments as necessary)
Thank you for your comments and suggestions regarding the
usefulness of the Subpart E Enabling Guidance Document. If you
have any questions regarding this document, please contact
Sheila Q. Milliken at (919) 541-2625 or send correspondence to
Pollutant Assessment Branch (MD-13) -, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
1.0 Introduction - Why issue Enabling Guidance?
1.1 History of NESHAP Delegations
Prior to 1990, the Clean Air Act (the Act) explicitly
provided the opportunity for the States to implement and enforce
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) program. The NESHAP program required the EPA to
establish Federal emission standards for non-criteria pollutants
which, in the judgment of the Administrator, cause or contribute
to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to result in
an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible,
or incapacitating reversible, illness. The Act encouraged the
delegation of the NESHAP program to the States. Section
112(d)(l), which contained the section 112 authority for the EPA
to delegate NESHAPs to the State, provided that "each State may
develop and submit to the Administrator a procedure for
implementation and enforcement emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants for stationary sources located in such State. If
the Administrator finds the State procedure is adequate, he/she
shall delegate to such State any authority he/she has under this
Act to implement and enforce such standards."
As can be seen from the language of section 112(d)(l), prior
to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (the Act) very few
conditions were specified on how to transfer the primary
authority for implementing the NESHAP program from the EPA to the
States. To help clarify the delegation process, the 1983 "Good
Practice Manual for Delegation of NESHAPs and NSPS" was
developed. This guidance document established the precedent for
flexibility in the approval process of delegation, since there
always existed an unambiguous, enforceable Federal emission
regulation that is both legally binding on a source and
ultimately enforceable by the EPA.
This transfer of authority could include an entire program,
individual standards, or portions of individual standards. The
criteria used by the EPA Regional Office in determining whether
to transfer the NESHAP program to the State was flexible. The
major requirement was that the State affirm its authority and
capability to implement and enforce the programs and show that
they are able to do so both legally and programmatically.
10
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
The 1983 "Good Practice Manual for .Delegation of NESHAPs and
NSPS" encouraged State agencies to accept full delegation of all
aspects of the implementation and enforcement of NESHAPs, but
recognized that there were situations where States were either
unwilling or unable to assume all responsibility for implementing
NESHAPs. Resource-oriented problems were noted as a main reason
for not accepting delegation.
1.2 Delegation under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 established many new
titles to the Clean Air Act, including the title V Operating
Permit Program. Title V requires States to develop and submit to
the EPA, a program for issuing operating permits to all major
sources including major sources of hazardous air pollutants
listed in section 112 of the Act. Title V also requires that
sufficient fees be imposed on sources to cover both the direct
and indirect costs of the operating permit program. In order to
receive approval of a Part 70 operating permit program, a State
must assure compliance by all sources required to have a part 70
operating permit with each applicable requirement of the Act,
including all section 112 requirements for part 70 sources.
Therefore, instead of encouraging States to assume delegation,
title V establishes a funding mechanism for the States and
compels them to assure compliance with each applicable
requirement of the Act for sources subject to permitting.
Additionally, the amendments added new section 112(1), which
provides the mechanism for delegating section 112 standards and
programs to the States. Since the language in section 112(1)
replaces the delegation language formerly found in section
112(d)(l), section 112(1) provides the exclusive pathway for
delegation of State air toxics programs.
Many States have developed or are developing air toxics
programs under State authorities. The Congress was very much
aware of the States' air toxics programs in the course of
developing the Act. These State programs, developed to address
specific State needs, may differ widely from Federal rules being
developed by the EPA under section 112 of the Act.
Existing State programs may result in emission reductions
that are more stringent than, equivalent to, or less stringent
than emission reductions resulting from corresponding Federal
standards. From discussions with States and other interested
parties concerning approval of State programs under section
11
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
112(1), it became clear that some States want to continue to ;
implement and enforce the requirements of their own air toxics
programs even though new section 112 requirements will be
promulgated.
Thus, section 112(1) allows for partial or complete
delegation of the Administrator's authorities and
responsibilities to implement and enforce standards as long as
the State regulation is no less stringent than the otherwise
applicable Federal rule. Unlike the former delegation language
under section 112(d)(l), section 112(1) explicitly allows
approval for State programs that are different than the Federal
program as long as the State standard is at least as stringent.
However, section 112(1) also clearly sets out prescriptive
requirements for approval of State air toxics programs and
delegation of standards under notice and comment rulemaking that
were not specified in the former section 112(d)(l) delegation
language. Section 112(1)(5) requires States to assure:
(1) compliance by all applicable sources within the State;
(2) adequate resources and authorities to implement the program;
(3) expeditious compliance of affected sources; and (4) that the
State program is in compliance with guidance issued by the
Administrator pursuant to section 112(1)(2).
Therefore, additional guidance was published in a rulemaking
entitled, "Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal
Authorities" (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart E). This rulemaking
establishes guidance for EPA approval of State air toxics rules
(i.e., promulgated regulations) or programs (i.e., any collection
of statutory, regulatory or policy requirements) that are at
least as stringent as otherwise applicable Federal section 112
rules.
1.3 Scope and Content of this Document
This manual is divided into the following chapters:
This chapter provides an introduction. Chapter 2 provides
an overview of the Subpart E rule requirements including a review
of the various options a State can choose when submitting a
request for approval under Subpart E. Chapter 3 outlines the
EPA's expectations on the roles and responsibilities of the key
players in the process - the State/local Agency, the EPA Regional
office and the EPA Headquarters office. Chapter 4 describes the
procedures and approval criteria under section 63.91 that are
12
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
common for all Subpart E submittals. Chapter 5 discusses how to
adopt a Federal section 112 rule or the Federal section 112
program without changes. Chapter 6 describes the procedures and
approval criteria for approval of an adjustment to a Federal
section 112 rule under section 63.92. Chapter 7 describes the
procedures and approval criteria for approval of a State rule or
State authorities under section 63.93 as well as further
clarification of the term "detailed demonstration." Chapter 8
describes the procedures and approval criteria for approval of a
generic State program under section 63.94 as well as an
additional explanation of the term "form of the standard."
Chapter 9 describes the procedures and approval criteria for a
State submittal of its Accidental Release Prevention program
under § 63,95. Chapter 10 examines the key points to keep in
mind regarding periodic review.
1.4 Intended use of this Document
This document is intended to supplement guidance provided in
the Subpart E rule. It is hoped that this document will provide
insight on the development and review of Subpart E submittals.
This document is not intended as a stand-alone guide to
submitting a Subpart E approval and therefore, a general
understanding of the subpart E rule is assumed.
In addition, this document is not intended to provide policy
discussions with respect to the approval procedures in Subpart E
and the alternatives that were considered. Readers interested in
more background of this nature should consult the preamble to the
final rule, scheduled for promulgation on November 15, 1993.
This document is also intended to provide guidance on the
approval and delegation of a State rule or State authorities
which address the following situations:
(1) A State or local agency seeking to replace a Federal
section 112 rule or program with a State or local rule
that is as least as stringent.
(2) A State or local agency seeking to adopt a Federal
section 112 rule without changes.
(3) A State or local agency seeking to adopt a Federal rule
before the State has an approved part 70 program in
place.
13
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
(4) A State or local agency seeking approval of a generic
program that can be substituted for existing and future
Federal emission standards.
(5) Approval of State or local agency's section 112(r)
accidental release prevention program.
Additional guidance specifically related to various section 112
provisions may also be developed as the air toxics regulations
are finalized.
14
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
2.0 Overview of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart E
This chapter provides a general overview of the Subpart E
rule. The three approval options for a State seeking delegation
are introduced, and the approval process is described. More
detailed information about approval options, including specific
requirements for each option, are found in later chapters of this
document. In addition, delegation of Federal section 112 rules
without changes and specific requirements for Accidental Release
Prevention programs are briefly discussed in this chapter as well
as in later chapters.
2.1 Overview of Subpart E Approval Options
Three approval options are available for States seeking
delegation and approval of State rules which differ from the
Federal standard. These options are designed to accommodate
varying levels of difference between State and Federal section
112 rules or programs, and to allow the review and delegation
effort to be appropriate to the level of difference.
The first approval option is for approval of a State rule
that adjusts a section 112 rule. The second option is for
approval of a State rule or State authorities that substitute for
a section 112 rule. The third option is for approval of a
generic State program that substitutes for section 112 emission
standards. This section introduces the three options, and
highlights differences between them. Chapters later in this
document are devoted to each of these options.
In addition, Subpart E provides for approval of State rules
or programs to implement and enforce Federal section 112 rules
without changes as promulgated by the EPA. Chapter 5 provides
information regarding delegation of Federal section 112 rules
without changes.
2.1.1 Ad-jus ting a Federal section 112 rule
The rule adjustment option (section 63.92) allows approval
of a State rule which is similar to, yet at least as stringent
as, a Federal rule. It may be used for any of the allowable
adjustments which result in State rules which are unequivocally
no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule* The list
of allowable adjustments is found in Chapter 6. This option is
designed to allow rapid approval of State rules which are -
unequivocally no less stringent. For this reason, the EPA does
not anticipate performing prolonged or detailed analysis of these
15
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
submittals. Although no Federal public comment period is
expected to be necessary under this option, the State rule-must
have undergone adequate public notice and comment at the State
level. In addition, if the State does not have an approved part
70 program or if this is the State's initial submittal under
Subpart E, then the State will have to follow the procedural
requirements under § 63.91 for Federal public notice and comment
and a 180 day EPA approval/disapproval review period. If a State
has a rule which differs from the Federal rule only in one or
more of these allowable adjustments, it should use this option to
expedite the review and approval process.
2.1.2 Substituting a State rule or authorities for a
section 112 rule
This option (section 63.93) allows approval of a State rule
(and in certain limited cases, a combination of State authorities
for a particular source category) with a greater deviation from
the applicable Federal rule than allowed under the rule
adjustment option. This approval option may be used when a State
seeks approval for a rule which differs significantly in
structure from a Federal rule. The review and approval process
for this option requires Federal public notice and comment, and
thus, takes a longer time for approval. In addition, the EPA
expects to perform more complicated and detailed analyses on
rules which differ significantly from Federal rules. A State is
required to make a detailed demonstration to the EPA under this
approval option which is further described in Chapter 7.
This option offers approval for States with rules which
would not be approvable under the rule adjustment option. If a
State has a rule, for example, which was developed independently
of the Federal rule and differs significantly from the Federal
rule, it should use this option.
2.1.3 Substituting-a generic State program for section 112_
emission standards
The program substitution option (section 63.94) allows
approval of a State program which will be implemented and
enforced in place of specified existing and future Federal
section 112 emission standards. Approval in this case is for the
generic State program, and may substitute for some or all section
112 emission standards. Under this option, a State program may
be approved in place of specific standards and requirements =
established under sections 112(d), (f), or (h). (Notes this
16
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
option is not available for rules which are not classified as
emission standards, such as the 112(g). rule for modifications.)
This option offers States with existing air toxics programs
which differ significantly in methodology (e.g. risk-based
programs) to receive upfront one-time approval for existing and
future section 112 emissions standards, rather than to receive
approval on a standard-by-standard basis. States must have part
70 program approval for this option. Under this option, a State
must make a legally-binding commitment through its part 70
operating permit program, which ensures that the results of the
State air toxics program will be at least as stringent as
otherwise applicable Federal section 112 emissions standards.
This commitments is described in detail in Chapter 8 of this
document. If a State seeks approval of an existing program which
differs significantly in methodology from the Federal program, it
should use this option. Since this option relies on part 70
program approval, a State can not receive approval of its program
under this option until the State has an approved part 70
program.
2.1.4 Additional Criteria for Approval of an accidental
release prevention program under section 112(r)
A section 112(r) program also has additional criteria which
apply. For approval of an Accidental Release Prevention program
without changes to the Federal rule the requirements of
section 63.91 and section 63.95 apply. For approval of State
rules which differ from the Federal program the requirements of
section 63.91, section 63.95 and either section 63.92 or
section 63.93 must be met. The approval criteria is further
described in Chapter 9 of this guidance document. For additional
guidance on delegation procedures, States and Regions may also
want to consult the draft document entitled "Guidance for the
Development of State Accidental Release Prevention Program under
112(r) of the Clean Air Act."
2.2 Considerations in submitting a request for approval under
subpart E
State or local agencies may elect to implement parts or all
of the Federal section 112 program in ways different than the
Federal program. If they choose to dp so, they would need to
follow the procedures described in Subpart E.. The following
examples illustrates some of those situations, which might make
sense from a State or local perspective.
17
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Example 1. A State Already Covers the Same Sources
There may be States for which an existing State program has
regulated the sources covered by the Federal rule. If the
existing State program is at least as stringent as the Federal
rule, the State may choose to use the Subpart E process to
maintain that rule instead of switching over to a system of
duplicative coverage and requirements.
Avoiding such a "dual regulation" situation has a number of
advantages which will improve the efficiency of section 112
implementation. First, permits resulting from dual regulation
are necessarily longer and more expensive to develop and approve
due to the need to specify separate sets of operating conditions
derived from both Federal and State regulations. Second,
compliance and enforcement costs may be greater because of two
sets of conditions that must be enforced. Third, and perhaps
most critically, permit conditions that result from dual
regulation may not always be complementary, and in some
instances, may even be fundamentally inconsistent in instances
where the Federal and State programs may require measures that
are technically incompatible. In this latter instance, it may be
physically difficult or impossible for a source to employ
simultaneously the controls and/or work practices mandated by
both Federal and State regulations.
The Subpart E process can be used to preserve requirements
of generic State programs (for example, risk-based programs that
can be demonstrated to be at least as stringent as the otherwise
applicable Federal section 112 standard) using the process and
criteria in section 63.94. The process can also be used to
preserve industry-specific rules using the procedures of
section 63.93.
Example 2. Local Considerations Suggest Special Needs
There may be situations where a State or local agency can
identify alternatives that are warranted by unique features of a
particular case, especially when the State or local agency has
gathered additional data above and beyond that gathered in the
national standard-setting process. For example, the State may be
able to identify controls for a given source that could achieve
the same emission reduction at less cost. In addition, the
nature of public exposure to emissions at the plant may suggest
to the State or local agency that additional control measures
should be considered.
18
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
In addition, a State rule that has required an innovative
pollution prevention strategy for a source category which
achieves emission reductions that are equal or greater at each
affected source and does not trade across pollutants (unless
allowed in the Federal rule) could be submitted for approval
under section 63.93 of subpart E.
Subpart E can be used by States to ensure that, when a State
needs to develop alternative requirements to address those
special needs, the affected source will not have to be subject to
dual regulation. In this way, the approved rule or program is
seen as explicitly including both the Federal rule, and where
necessary based upon local considerations, State and local
requirements.
Example 3. Advances in Technology
A third area for which Subpart E could be useful is in
providing the State with an opportunity to consider advances in
technology that have occurred subsequent to the Federal rule, but
before a national regulation has been finalized to reflect those
changes.
Example 4. A State wants to Adopt the Federal Program without
Changes
Another area for which Subpart E could be useful is to
establish a mechanism for future delegation of Federal section
112 rules without changes even before the part 70 operating
permit program is in place for a State. Once a State has been
granted an approved program under section 63.91 of Subpart E for
delegation of Federal section 112 rules as promulgated, a State
may utilize the mechanism established in the section 63.91
Subpart E submittal for section 112 standards as promulgated
before an approved part 70 program is established, for deferred
area sources and for existing NESHAPs that have not been
delegated to the State.
2.3 The Subpart E Approval Process
The Subpart E approval process is initiated when a State
applies for delegation under any of the three approval options
described above or when a State, applies for delegation of Federal
section 112 rules without changes. A sample application is
included in Appendix E of this document. Typically, this
application is submitted with a letter from the Governor of the
State or the Governor's designee which formally announces the
19
-------
-------
SUBFART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
request for approval. A sample Governor's letter is included in
Appendix F. Regardless of which approval option is chosen, all
States must fill out the General Information (Part 1) and the
Criteria Common to All Options (Part 2) of the application.
Next, the State completes whichever part of the application
corresponds to the approval option the State has chosen. Part 3
is for the rule adjustment option; Part 4 is for the rule or
authority substitution option; and Part 5 is for the program
substitution option. In addition, the State must also complete
Part 6 of the application if the State is seeking delegation of a
rule which replaces section 112(r), the Accidental Release
Prevention Program or if the State wants to adopt section 112(r)
without changes. Note that the application will not provide
enough space for detailed responses. It is intended to serve as
a guideline of what responses are necessary and to provide the
Region with the location of the State regulations and/or
demonstrations that satisfy the approval criteria.
One of the criteria common to all approval options is the
Attorney General's finding of adequate legal authority. This
must be a written finding from the State Attorney General that
the State has the necessary legal authority to implement and
enforce the State rule or program upon approval, and to assure
compliance with each applicable section 112 rule. This finding
must be obtained from the Attorney General's office and included
with the rest of the application submitted by the State agency.
An example Attorney General's certification is included in
Appendix F.
Upon receipt of the completed submittal by the Regional
Office, review begins. Review differs depending on the approval
option selected by the State. Figure 1 shows a flow diagram of
the overall approval process, and Figure 2 shows timelines for
review and approval. In addition, if the State does not have an
approved part 70 permit program before the State makes its
initial request for approval under Subpart E then the State must
follow the procedural requirements under section 63.91 of Subpart
E for the initial request regardless of which approval option the
State is utilizing. The procedural requirements under 63.91 are
described in Chapter 4 and include a Federal public comment
period and a 180-day EPA review period.
For all of the approval options, the Regional Office has 30
days from receipt of the submittal to finish a completeness
review. After the 30-day completeness review, the Regional
Office notifies the State with the results of the completeness
review. Sample text for this letter is included in Appendix F.
20
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
If the submittal was found incomplete, the Regional Office lists
the reasons for finding the submittal incomplete. For an
incomplete submittal, the process ends here, but the State may
address these problems and resubmit a revised rule or program for
approval. If the submittal passes the completeness review, the
EPA will start with the 180-day approval process.
Since the rule adjustment (section 63.92) option does not
usually have an additional public comment period, the EPA will
make its final approval or disapproval within 90 days of
determining that a State's submittal is complete. However, if
the State does not have an approved part 70 program and if this
is the State's initial submittal under Subpart E, then the State
will have to go through a Federal public comment period and a
180-day EPA review period. The EPA must send a letter informing
the State of the results of its review, and must publish a
Federal Register notice announcing approval or disapproval.
For each of the remaining approval options (section 63.93
and section 63.94) and for a State seeking delegation of Federal
section 112 rules without changes, the Regional Administrator
must seek public comments within 45 days of receiving the
complete submittal. The 180-day review period does not begin
until the EPA determines that the submittal is complete. A
Federal Register notice will be published announcing that the EPA
has received a complete State submittal and is accepting public
comment on whether to approve or disapprove the State submittal.
This Federal Register notice is not intended to address EPA's
determination of whether to approve or disapprove the State
submittal. Sample text for this notice and general guidelines
for Federal Register notices are also included in Appendix F.
The public comment period must last at least 30 days from
the publication date of the Federal Register notice. The
Regional Administrator will require that public comments be
submitted concurrently to the State and to the EPA. Within 30
days of the close of the public comment period, the State may
prepare and submit responses to public comments for consideration
by the Regional Office in the final review. If the public
comment period lasts 30 days, the Regional Office then has about
75 days (for a total of 180 days since the Regional Office
determined the original submittal to be complete) to finish its
final review, and publish the Federal Register notice announcing
final approval or disapproval. The Regional Office must also
send a letter to the State notifying the State of the results of
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
the final review, and in the case of disapproval, the reasons for
disapproval. Sample text for the final Federal Register notice
and final approval/disapproval letter is included in Appendix F.
22
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Insert Figure 1
23
-------
-------
Figure 1. Flow Diagram of Administrative Procedures
for Delegation Under Subpart E
Application for
Delegation
State Submittal
for Delegation
Governor's
(or Designee's) Letter
1
Satisfy Criteria Common
to all Options1
(Application Parts 1 and 2)
Which
Delegation
Option?
Rule
Adjustment
Section 63.92
Rule
Substitution
Section 63.93
Program
Substitution
Section 63.94
Delegation of
Federal Standards
as Promulgated
Section 63.91
Satisfy Criteria
for Section 63.92
(Application Part 3)
±
Satisfy Criteria
for Section 63.93
(Application Part 4)
JL
Satisfy Criteria
for Section 63,94
(Application Parts)
Completeness
Review^
1
Completeness
Review
Federal Register
Notice Announcing
Public Comment Period
States Submit Responses;
to Public Comments:
to Regional Administrator
Final Review
Notification of Final
Approval/Disapproval
JL
Final
Federal Register
Notice
Submittals for delegation of Accidental Release Programs also must satisfy the
requirements of Section 63.95 (Application Part 6).
For States without approved Part 70 programs, or those without any prior
Supoart E delegations, a public comment period occurs for the first
delegation under this option.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Insert Figure 2
24
-------
-------
o
00
in
m
in
m
a
o
a,
a,
03
a,
o
a>
S3
a
o>
I
a
CM
O>
8
OH
S
O)
CO
(O
CO
8
O>
eo
a> >»
C 0
en c
'35 *
Q^
j^. flj
w **
c ^
O Q)
o ~
o
r 5
»• +>••
J CO
r
K
:v. a
OP
i
Q
C
U
i
?:•
,;.;
1
U
1
J
'S
o
•<
S
i
c
<
C
r '
^
CS
T"
T-
•^
•^
«a
ro".'
•••;•'**;
•:v'cr
- .-o^.
• w,..
r>
i
i
r
f 2
""cL
'I
5*
S > 2
P 5 °»
0) M
c co .co
01 O.^,
a> a> CM
T» •
«*••
fflpflf^ff ft.;i| ll^lffi^ .iffp a...
•:
^^^ rt*^--
• . • ^_ V " ' jaM :
CO 4^ Cu
'":o-' E;'§:
( fl): ft<::'5>
MM'' •**•'• ^
^^il
•IMMEBBK iff !!1R! WBgi
- §
"5 21 15
c S •»
o o gj
CD o 2
;5iil*
"i o*
0 <=
— k_
o» 2
^ §
II
s 2
municate dlr«
ed of any issi
l§
«• £
Ul CO
a O
uf S-
O o
§1
0 T»
li
J S°
13 aT &
« 8 g
ill
E: Dashed llnea
the Regional
arise during
|
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
3.1 State and Local Agencies
Since submitting a different State program through Subpart E
is voluntary, the State has the primary responsibility of
initiating the process. Outlined below are a few suggestions of
what a State might want to consider to accomplish during the
approval process.
1. Once a Federal rule is proposed, the State should evaluate
whether there are any affected sources which have existing State
regulations that apply to them.
2. If the State does have an existing program that applies to
affected sources, then the State should compare its existing
program to the proposed Federal program and identify any
significant differences. If the EPA has not included a control
technology or approach that the State currently requires that is
more stringent, then the State should submit its approach to the
EPA during the comment period for the Federal section 112
standard.
3. The State should evaluate the benefits of using Subpart E.
If there are benefits, then the State should consider which
approval option under Subpart E should be employed.
4. States that want to apply for Subpart E approval, should
contact the Regional Office during the proposal - promulgation
time frame so that Regions will have a better idea of the
resources and time needed for stringency determinations. The
State should specify which approval option is being considered.
In addition, States who plan to simply adopt the Federal standard
should also inform the Regional Office during the proposal -
promulgation time frame.
5. The State may also want to consider having pre-application
meetings with the Region. Detailed pre-application meetings will
help States identify concerns and discuss them with the Region
before beginning to prepare their submittals. In addition, the
State will be able to anticipate necessary changes to its rules
and eliminate delays because it can begin the rulemaking process
long before making its formal submittal, rather than waiting
until disapproval before beginning the process.
6. In addition, the State and Regional Offices may want to
consider entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs).
These documents could address procedures for (1) problem
resolution, (2) program revisions, (3) the enforcement
32
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
relationship and 4) program implementation until official
delegation is completed. An MOU can act as a vehicle for
communicating the respective roles of the State and the EPA and
clearly spelling out the purpose and limitations of that role.
For example, the Regional role in this partnership could
include: providing information and guidance regarding the
Federal section 112 regulations; providing technical guidance
to the States; providing comments and suggestions early in the
delegation process; communicating national and Regional
priorities; and providing information on other successful
State programs. The State role could include: providing
prompt responses to Regional concerns, providing input to the
Regions with regard to further development of national program
development, and guaranteeing that the Subpart E program will
be adequately implemented by the State.
In the case where the section 112 rule has not been officially
delegated to a State yet, the MOU could be used to contract
with the State to perform the administrative implementation of
the section 112 rule.
7. If a State chooses to use Subpart E, the State should send
the submittal to the appropriate EPA Regional Office.
8. The State will have the burden of showing that its program
is no less stringent than the otherwise applicable Federal
section 112 standard. If the State does not make a complete
demonstration to the EPA, then the Region will notify the State
within 30 days.
9. The State should work closely with the Regional Office to
address any conflicts as quickly as possible. The 180-day review
period will not start until EPA receives a complete submittal.
10. After the public comment period closes for options
section 63.93 and section 63.94 as well as for delegation of
Federal section 112 rules without changes, the State may submit
responses to the public comments to the Regional Administrator
within 30 days of the close of the public comment period. The
Regional Administrator will require that public comments be
submitted concurrently to the State. The State responses will be
evaluated by the Regional Administrator in the final approval
decision.
11. If the State has an approved State program under
section 63.94 and plans to issue a part 70 permit that will
33
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
incorporate the State rule in the form of the Federal rule, the
State should provide the EPA Regional Office with a copy of each
proposed permit for a 45-day review period and potential EPA
veto.
12. For later standards, States may want to consider
submitting their State programs to EPA Headquarters to be used in
the development of the MACT standard. This may help to avoid
some stringency problems in the future.
3.2 Regional Offices
The Regions should encourage the States to start thinking
about Subpart E at the time a Federal rule is proposed. The
Region should start working with States who are interested in
Subpart E during the time frame between proposal and promulgation
as well as once the Federal rule is final. The Regions may also
want to consider having a review team that encompasses several
different areas. The team, for example, may include the Air
Toxics coordinator, a Regional person representing enforcement, a
Regional person representing permitting, a Regional attorney, and
a Regional representative for section 112(r) when applicable. In
many Regions, one Regional person may represent several roles.
Outlined below are a few suggestions that the Regions may want to
consider.
1. The Region could incorporate some general milestones into
the Air Toxics Section 105 Grants. One milestone could be to
notify the EPA within 60 days of a proposed section 112 standard
whether the State is considering utilizing Subpart E.
2. The Region could survey all of their States soon after a
Federal rule is proposed and ask the States whether they are
planning to use Subpart E.
3. If Subpart E is being considered by a State, the Region
could request a copy of any existing State programs that apply to
the affected sources. The Region should assist the State in
comparing the State program to the Federal program during the
proposal - promulgation timeframe. The Region should identify
additional State authorities needed at the State level. The
Region should also help identify areas where the State will need
to change its regulations to make them equivalent with the
Federal program.
4. Since the Region can not release specific information to
the State regarding significant changes to the final Federal
34
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
rule, the Region should try to identify potential problems with
the existing State regulation and the final Federal rule.
5. As soon as the final Federal rule is released, the Region
should provide the State with a summary of any potential issues
that have been identified.
6. As discussed in the previous section, the Region and State
may want to consider having a pre-application meeting.
7. Within 30 days of receipt by an EPA Regional Office of a
Subpart E submittal, the Regional Administrator will notify the
State whether its submittal is complete enough to warrant review
by EPA.
8. If the EPA finds that a State's submittal is complete, the
180-day review period begins on the date that the EPA Regional
Office determined the State's submittal complete. If the EPA
finds that a State's submittal is incomplete, the 180-day review
period shall not begin until the EPA receives a complete
submittal.
9. If the State's submittal is incomplete, the Regional Office
should notify the State of all deficiencies and work closely with
the State to resolve any problems.
10. For Subpart E approvals under options section 63.93 and
section 63.94 and once the State's submittal is determined
complete, the Regional Office will forward a copy of the State's
complete submittal to OE, OGC, and the OAQPS clearinghouse
contact. If the submittal involves accidental releases under
section 112(r), then CEPP should also receive a copy of the
submittal. Please see Appendix B for the list of Headquarter
offices contacts and addresses. For Subpart E approvals
submitted under option section 63.92 as well as for delegation of
Federal section 112 rules without changes under section 63.91,
Headquarters will not normally be forwarded a copy of the State's
submittal for review.
11. Within 45 days of determining a request for approval
complete, the Regional Administrator shall seek public comment
for a minimum of 30 days on the State's request for approval.
The Regional Office will publish the notice for public comment in
tne Federal Register. The Regional Administrator will require
that public comments be submitted concurrently to the State.
This step is not necessary for Subpart E approvals made under
section 63.92, unless the State does not have an approved part 70
35
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
program and this is the State's initial submittal under Subpart E
in which case the State will have follow .the procedural
requirements under section 63.91.
12. For approval options section 63.93 and section 63.94, the
Regional Office and the Headquarters reviewing offices are
encouraged to have a conference call by around day 80 to discuss
the major approval or disapproval issues identified by each
office. During the call, the Regional Office could also
summarize the quantity and content of the public comments
received during the comment period.
13. The EPA Regional Office along with the other EPA Offices
including: OAQPS, OGC, OE, and CEPP (if applicable) shall
evaluate any comments made during the public comment period
including any State responses to the public comments.
Headquarters should provide the Regional Office with all
approval/disapproval issues as soon as possible, but no later
than day 105. If comments are received from Headquarters, the
Regional Office should consider all comments when determining
whether to approve or disapprove the submittal.
14. For Subpart E approvals submitted under options
section 63.93 and section 63.94, the Regional Administrator
should make a preliminary determination on approving or
disapproving the State's submittal within 130 days of determining
a request for approval complete. The Regional Office should
forward the draft Federal Register with the preliminary approval
or disapproval to each Headquarters reviewing office for a 15 day
review. For Subpart E approvals submitted under option
section 63.92 as well as for delegation of Federal section 112
rules without changes under section 63.91, Headquarters review is
not required but may be requested by the Regional Office.
15. The Regional Administrator shall approve or disapprove a
State's submittal within 180 days of determining a request
complete. If the Headquarters reviewing offices do not identify
any concerns with the State's submittal, then the Regional Office
can forward the Federal Register notice to the Regional
Administrator for signature on day 150. If comments are received
from Headquarters regarding the draft Federal Register notice,
the Regional Office should consider additional comments regarding
the content of the draft notice rather than whether the submittal
should be approved or disapproved. Headquarters should have
commented on all approval/disapproval issues by day 105. If a
conflict arises, please see the process for issue resolution
which is discussed in the EPA Headquarters section number 5. For
36
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Subpart E approvals submitted under-option section.63.92, the
Regional Administrator shall approve or disapprove a State'. a i •_
submittal within 90 days of determining a State's request is.
complete.
16. Once a State's submittal is approved or disapproved, the
Regional Office shall publish a Federal Register notice
approving/disapproving the State's submittal.
3.3 EPA Headquarters Office
As discussed earlier, Headquarter's offices have a major role
in developing national decision criteria (i.e., the criteria
Regions apply when evaluating State submittals), but a less
active role in implementation of these decision criteria during
the review of individual Subpart E submittals»
1. If during the comment period for a proposed Federal rule,
any additional control technologies or approaches are identified
by a State/local agency, EPA Headquarters should consider whether
the alternative approaches can be specified within the final
Federal standard. To the extent possible, all equivalent
approaches identified should be incorporated into the final
Federal rule.
2. Within the MACT Standards and section 112 programs, EPA
Headquarters may want to include more specific delegation
guidance in the text of the proposed standard. Headquarters can
receive comments and suggestions from the Regions, States, etc.
and publish final guidance with the final rule. Headquarters may
also want to include delegation guidance in final section 112
standards or in a separate manual on controversial delegation
issues that are specific to that standard.
3. Headquarters staff including OAQPS, OE, OGC and CEPP (if
applicable) should be available to participate in the pre-
application meetings for consultation.
4. Headquarters should keep the Regional Offices informed of
any major changes to a proposed section 112 standard. This will
help the Regions ensure that any outstanding issues with a
State's Subpart E submittal are identified as soon as possible.
5. For Subpart E approvals under options section 63.93 and
section 63.94 and once the State's submittal is deemed complete,
a copy of the State's complete submittal will be sent to OE, OGC,
and the OAQPS clearinghouse contact. If the submittal involves
37
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
accidental releases under section 112(.r), then CEPP will also
receive a copy of the submittal. For Subpart E approvals
submitted under options section 63.91 and section 63.92,
Headquarters review is not required, but may be requested by the
Regions. Headquarters reviewing offices should provide the
Regional Office with any comments that may effect the Regions
decision on approving or disapproving a State's submittal as soon
as possible, but no later than day 105. Each Headquarters
reviewing agency should also send a copy of any comments to the
OAQPS clearinghouse contact.
6. For approval options section 63.93 and section 63.94, the
Regional Office and the Headquarters reviewing offices are
encouraged to have a conference call by around day 80 to discuss
the major approval or disapproval issues identified by each
office. During the call, the Regional Office could also
summarize the quantity and content of the major public comments
received during the public comment period.
7. For Subpart E approvals submitted under options
section 63.93 and section 63.94, the Regional Office will forward
the draft Federal Register with the preliminary approval or
disapproval by day 135 to each Headquarters reviewing office for
a 15 day review. For Subpart E approvals submitted under
approval option section 63.92 and for delegation of Federal
section 112 standards without changes, Headquarters review is not
required but may be requested by the Regional Office.
Headquarters reviewing offices should identify concerns
regarding the content of the draft notice rather than whether
the submittal should be approved or disapproved during this 15
day review period. Headquarters should have commented on all
approval/disapproval issues by day 105. The Headquarters
reviewer is responsible for contacting the Regional contact to
try and resolve the issue. Each Headquarters reviewing office
should also send a copy of any comments to the OAQPS
clearinghouse contact.
If Headquarters and the Regional Office agree to language
changes, the Regional Office will revise the Federal Register
notice by day 160 and submit revisions to Headquarters for
review. Headquarters has until day 165 to review suggested
changes. If Headquarters agrees with the language changes,
the Regional Office forwards the Federal Register notice to
the Regional Administrator for signature. If the Regional
Office staff and the Headquarters staff cannot agree on a
resolution, the respective Branch Chiefs will determine if the
38
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
issue should be raised to the Division:Director.level :by day
160. If resolution is still not .reached by day 170,'
Headquarters may provide further information and guidance. ^In
future versions of this guidance document either Headquarters
will be given a limited time to nonconcur or the final
decision will be made by the Regional Administrator.
Currently, this issue is unresolved and will be addressed in
future guidance.
8. Headquarters should identify a contact person to act as a
"clearinghouse" of information and advice who will process
queries and requests for information from Regions using a
consistent set of answers, procedures, and informational
materials. This contact will ensure the accuracy and
consistency of all information reaching the Regions from
Headquarters, and document all discussions and information
transmittals in order to keep track of what has been requested
and what has been provided. In addition, the OAQPS
clearinghouse contact will receive all State submittals under
approval options section 63.93 and section 63.94 that the
Regional Office will forward for OAQPS review. The OAQPS
contact should review submittals for option section 63.94 and
should forward submittals under option section 63.93 to the
project lead for the rule being submitted.
8. If similar issues arise in several Regional Offices,
Headquarters should consider incorporating additional guidelines
within the appropriate sections of this document. Headquarters
may also provide guidance through the Technology Transfer Network
(TTN) as well as through various newsletters.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
4.0 Section 63.91 of Subpart E
Common Elements of Subpart E Reviews
The following Chapter of the guidance describes the general
procedural requirements and common criteria that must be met for
all Subpart E submittals. States seeking delegation of Federal
section 112 rules without changes must meet the additional
procedural requirements discussed in Chapter 5. States
requesting approval of a different State rule or program will
also have to meet one of the three specific sets of criteria
which correspond to one of the three approval options: approval
of a State rule that adjusts a section 112 rule (Chapter 6),
approval of a State rule or State authorities that substitute for
a section 112 rule (Chapter 7), or approval of a generic State
program which substitutes for some or all section 112 emission
standards or requirements (Chapter 8). In addition, State rules
regarding Accidental Release Prevention programs will have to
meet the specific criteria in Chapter 9. This chapter also
discusses authority not conferred by delegation and concurrent
Federal authority retained by the EPA.
4.1 Procedural Requirements
The general procedures set forth below must be followed by a
State requesting delegation of authority pursuant to Subpart E.
In addition to the general procedures and approval criteria
outlined below, the procedures and approval criteria of either
option section 63.92 (Chapter 6), section 63.93 (Chapter 7) or
section 63.94 (Chapter 8) must be addressed unless the State is
seeking delegation of the Federal standard as promulgated
(Chapter 5). For approval of State programs to implement and
enforce Federal section 112 rules as promulgated without changes
(except for accidental release programs), only the approval
criteria and the procedures outlined in this chapter must be met.
Delegation of Federal section 112 standards without changes is
discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. For approval of State
rules or programs to implement and enforce the Federal Accidental
Release Prevention program with or without changes, the
requirements of this section and the approval criteria of
section 63.95 (Chapter 9) must be.met.
For a State's initial request for approval, and except for as
otherwise specified under section 63.92, 63.93, or 63.94 for a
State's subsequent requests for approval, the approval process
will be the following:
40
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
1. The Governor or the- Governor ':s designee of the State shall
submit to the appropriate Regional Administrator of the EPA a
written request for delegation of authority pursuant to section
112(1). The request must demonstrate the adequacy of the State
rule or program with respect to the approval criteria set forth
in this guidance.
2. The request may seek delegation of authority to implement
and enforce any section 112 standard which has been promulgated
at the time of the request. The request should specify the
source categories for which delegation is being sought. In
addition, there are two ways a State may request future
delegation of section 112 standards. A State requesting
delegation of Federal section 112 standards without changes, may
submit a program under section 63.91 establishing a mechanism for
future delegation of section 112 standards as promulgated even
before the State has an approved part 70 permit program. In
addition, a State with an approved part 70 program who is seeking
delegation of its more stringent State program may utilize
approval option section 63.94 which allows a State to request
delegation of future section 112 rules.
3. The Regional Administrator will review the request for
approval and notify the Governor or the Governor's designee
within 30 days of receipt whether the request for approval is
complete according to the approval criteria in this guidance.
4. If, after review of public comments and any State responses
to comments submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30
days of the close of the public comment period, the Regional
Administrator finds that the approval criteria for section 63.91
are met along with any other applicable approval criteria under
section 63.92, section 63.93 or section 63.94 for States seeking
delegation of its different State program or authorities, then
the State program or authorities will be approved by the Regional
Administrator, published in the Federal Register and incorporated
directly or by reference, under Part 63, Subpart A and under the
subpart containing the otherwise applicable Federal rule. State
authorities approved under section 63.95 (Chapter 9) will be
incorporated under part 68.
5. Within 180 days of receiving a complete Subpart E
submittal, the Regional Administrator shall notify.the Governor
or the Governor's designee in writing whether and to what extent
the request has been approved or disapproved. If the request is
disapproved, the notification to the Governor shall specify the
reasons for such disapproval and any revisions or additions
41
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
necessary to obtain approval.
considered a new request.
Any resubmittal by a State: will be
6. If the request is approved in whole or in part, the
Regional Administrator shall delegate to the Governor authority
to carry out the approved portions of the State rule or program.
A Notice of Delegation will subsequently be published in the
Federal Register. The Notice of Delegation shall identify the
approved State rule or program by reference to the request and to
any additional submission by the Governor or the Governor's
designee supplementing or modifying the State rule or program and
shall specify which portions of the proposed State rule or
program, if any, are disapproved. Such approved rule or program
shall be Federally enforceable from the date of publication of
approval.
7. A delegation of authority pursuant to Subpart E shall not
authorize Federal implementation and enforcement of section 112
standards according to a State rule or program which is different
from the approved State rule or program identified in the Notice
of Delegation unless a revised State rule or program is submitted
by the Governor or the Governor's designee and is approved by the
Regional Administrator according to the procedures established in
the final Subpart E rule 40 CFR section 63.91(c).
4o2 General Approval Criteria
Any request for Subpart E approval must meet the following
general approval criteria in addition to the specific approval
criteria established for each Subpart E approval option.
1. A written finding by the State Attorney General (or for a
local agency, the General Counsel with full authority to
represent the local agency) that the State has the necessary
legal authority to implement and enforce the State rule or
program upon approval and to assure compliance by all sources
within the State with each applicable section 112 rule,
emission standard or requirement.
The Attorney General's finding should include a statement
that the laws of a State provide adequate authority to
carry out all aspects of the rule or program being
submitted including all of the enforcement authorities
identified in this section. This statement shall include
citations of the specific statutes or administrative
regulations, and, where appropriate, judicial decisions
that demonstrate adequate authority. State statutes and
42
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
regulations cited by the State Attorney General shall be in
the form of lawfully adopted State regulations at the time
the statement is signed and shall be fully effective by the
time the State rule or program is approved. Appendix F
contains a sample Attorney General letter.
At a minimum, the State must have the following legal
authorities concerning enforcement:
(i) The State shall have enforcement authorities that meet
the requirements of section 70.11 of part 70.
section 70.11 requires permitting authorities to have
authority to seek and impose civil penalties and
criminal fines as well as injunctive relief.
(ii) The State shall have authority to request information
from regulated sources regarding its compliance status.
(iii) The State shall have authority to inspect sources and
records required to determine a source's compliance
status.
For example, upon presentation of credentials and other
documents as may be required by law, the State should
be able tos 1) enter the location where the emissions
related activity is conducted, 2) have access to and
copy any records relating to this State rule or
program, 3) inspect at reasonable times any facilities,
equipment, practices or operations regulated by this
State rule or program and 4) sample or monitor at
reasonable times substances or parameters for the
purpose of assuring compliance with the applicable
requirements of this State rule or program.
iv) If a State delegates authorities to a local agency, the
State must retain enforcement authority unless the
local agency has authorities that meet the requirements
ofsection 70.11 of part 70.
A copy of State statutes, regulations, and other requirements
that contain the appropriate provisions granting authority to
implement and enforce the State rule or program upon approval.
The State regulations and authorities should be clearly
marked for easy reference. As indicated on the Subpart E
43
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
application form, for each approval criteria the State will
have to reference the page number (citation) of the
specific State regulation or authority which satisfies each
approval criteria (if applicable).
3. A demonstration that the State has adequate resources to
implement and enforce all aspects of the rule or program upon
approval, which includes:
(i) a description in narrative form of the scope,
structure, coverage and processes of the State program;
The scope description could include a comparison to the
scope of the Federal rule. This section could include
a comparison to the Federal rule with regard to
consistent applicability, definitions that are
consistent with the Federal rule and General
Provisions, standards that are at least as stringent as
the Federal rule, test methods and monitoring that are
consistent with the Federal rule or that are
demonstrated to be at least as stringent, and reporting
and record keeping requirements that are as stringent
as the Federal rule.
The structure description could address whether the
State standard is structured similarly to the Federal
standard. For example, does the State standard take a
risk-based approach or a control technology approach?
The coverage description could include an approximate
number of affected sources and what equipment is
required.
(ii) a description of the organization and structure of the
agency or agencies that will have responsibility for
administering the program.
If more than one agency is responsible for
administering the rule or program, the responsibility
of each agency should be delineated, their procedures
for coordination should be set forth, and an agency
should be designated as a "lead agency": to facilitate
communications between EPA and the other agencies
having program responsibility. The organizational
structure should include a primary contact and phone
number for each agency identified. It may be useful to
44
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
include a simple chart of the organizational structure
which describes the relationship and responsibility of
each State agency involved in implementation.
(iii) a description of the agency staff who will carry out
the State program, including the number, occupation,
and general duties of the employees.
The State need not submit complete job descriptions for
every employee carrying out the State program.
4. A schedule demonstrating expeditious State implementation of
the rule or program upon approval.
The State should demonstrate an expeditious implementation
schedule, if the Federal rule is final, or have the
authority to require affected sources to be in compliance
at least as quickly as they would have been required by the
otherwise applicable Federal rule. This demonstration
assures that the State can expeditiously implement the
section 112 program.
5. A plan that assures expeditious compliance by all sources to
the rule or program upon approval. The plan should include at
minimum a complete description of the State's compliance
tracking and enforcement program, including but not limited to
inspection strategies.
This plan assures that the source will comply with the
State's approved program or rule.
One mechanism to assure the Regional Office of expeditious
compliance of all sources is to utilize section 105 grant
objectives. Some additional grant objectives that could be
included are: (1) a target number of section 112
inspections for the State rule being submitted that must be
conducted by the State in a fiscal year; (2) performance
test reviews of stack tests that were conducted in
accordance with section 112 requirements; and (3) timely
and appropriate enforcement action against sources that
violate section 112 requirements.
Another mechanism to assure the Regional Office of
expeditious compliance is to enter into a Memorandum of
Understanding regarding compliance tracking and enforcement
strategies.
45
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
In addition, a State should follow both the Significant
Violator Timely and Appropriate Guidance which defines
significant violators and what EPA considers to be timely
and appropriate enforcement responses to those significant
violators, and the Compliance Monitoring Strategy which
discusses inspection targeting and requirements.
6. A demonstration of adequate legal authority to assure
compliance with the rule or program upon approval. At a
minimum, the State must have the following legal authorities
concerning enforcement:
(i) The State shall have enforcement authorities that meet
the requirements of section 70.11 of part 70.
(ii) If a State delegates authorities to a local agency,
the State must retain enforcement authority unless the
local agency has authorities that meet the requirements of
section 70.11 of part.
4.3 Authority Conferred and Not Conferred by Delegation
If the State seeks delegation of a different State rule or
program, then delegation to a State pursuant to Subpart E confers
authority to implement and enforce the section 112 standards and
programs in accordance with the approved State rule or program.
If the State seeks delegation of the Federal standard without
changes, then delegation to a State pursuant to Subpart E confers
authority to implement and enforce the Federal section 112 rules
and programs without changes. The authority not conferred under
Subpart E includess
(1) The authority to add or delete pollutants from the list of
hazardous air pollutants established under section 112(b).
If the State rule wants to include additional pollutants
that are not included on the list established under section
112(b), those pollutants will not be Federally enforceable.
However, the States must have the authority to amend its
list of HAP, if EPA adds or deletes a chemical from the
list established under section 112(b).
(2) The authority to add or delete substances from the list of
substances established under section 112(r).
If the State rule includes additional substances to the
list established under section 112(r), those substances
46
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
will not be Federally enforceable. However, a- State must
have the authority to amend its list of substances, if EPA
adds or deletes a substance from the list established under
(3) The authority to delete source categories from the Federal
source category list established under section 112(c)(l) or to
subcategorize categories on the Federal source category list
after proposal of a relevant Federal section 112 emission
standard.
(4) The authority to revise the source category schedule
established under section 112 (e) by moving a source to a later
date for promulgation.
(5) Any other authorities determined to be non-delegable by
the Administrator.
(6) Certain authorities for the regulation of radionuclides;
See the Subpart E rule for further discussion.
4.4 Concurrent Federal Authority
Pursuant to section 112(1) (7), the EPA retains the concurrent
authority to enforce the section 112 rules and programs in
Federal court. After delegation to a State, the EPA will
exercise its concurrent authority when necessary to secure
effective enforcement of the delegated section 112 rule or
program. In exercising its concurrent authority, EPA is not
bound by any State action or determination in carrying out
authority delegated to the State pursuant to section 112(1).
47
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
5.0 Adoption the unchanged; Federal section 112 standards
The following Chapter of the guidance describes how Federal
section 112 standards as promulgated can be transferred to a
State or local agency.
The language in section 112(1) provides the mechanism for
delegating Federal section 112 standards and requirements to the
States. Since the language in section 112(1) replaces that
formerly found in section 112(d), section 112(1) now provides the
exclusive pathway for section 112 delegation. Section 112(1)(5)
clearly sets prescriptive requirements for approval after
November 15, 1990 of State air toxics programs and delegation of
section 112 standards and requirements under notice and comment
rulemaking.
5-l Before Part 70 Approval and Non-part 70 Sources
Section 63.91 of Subpart E has been amended from proposal to
provide for approval of State rules or programs that implement
and enforce future Federal section 112 rules as promulgated by
EPA. This section provides a mechanism for delegation of Federal
section 112 standards and requirements prior to approval of a
State's part 70 operating permit program and for Federal section
112 requirements applicable to sources that are not subject to
the requirements of part 70. A State seeking formal EPA approval
for programs to implement and enforce Federal section 112 rules
as promulgated must meet the common approval criteria described
in Chapter 4 including the requirement for notice and opportunity
for public comment.
5.1.1 Procedural Requirements
For a State requesting delegation under section 112(1) of
Federal section 112 rules as promulgated without changes, the
procedural requirements discussed in Chapter 4 must be followed.
In general, a Subpart E submittal for a State seeking
delegation of Federal section 112 standards without changes
requires a submittal of a request for approval under
section 63.91, notice in the Federal Register that the EPA has
received a request for approval, a public comment period of at
least 30 days, and a notice in the Federal Register that the EPA
has approved or disapproved the request. Where the State intends
to implement and enforce the section 112 requirement as
promulgated by EPA, this notice and comment rulemaking, even
where it cannot be combined with the part 70 approval process can
48
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
be expeditiously-accomplished in many cases. See below for
discussion of automatic delegation and direct final approaches.
5.1,2 Approval Criteria
Any request for Subpart E approval of Federal section 112
rules as promulgated must meet the common criteria in
section 63.91 (discussed in Chapter 4) before approval may be
granted. For section 112(r), the requirements of section 63.95
must also be met.
A State may submit a request which satisfies the approval
criteria in section 63.91 and specifies the mechanism that the
State will utilize to assume delegation of future Federal section
112 standards as promulgated. In order to use this option, the
State must have adequate authority under State law to accept
delegation of future standards to be promulgated by the EPA. The
public will have an opportunity to comment on the approval
criteria in section 63.91, which fulfill the prescriptive
requirements of 112(1)(5), as well as the mechanism that the
State will use for any future delegation of a Federal section 112
standard as promulgated. Once the State's request under
section 63.91 has been approved by EPA, that State will have
established a program which satisfies the public notice and
comment requirement for all future delegations of Federal section
112 standards as promulgated and may utilize the delegation
mechanism established under section 63.91 as long as there is a
mechanism to assure that a State continues to meet the approval
criteria in section 63.91 of Subpart E. For example, if the
State for some reason was unable to meet its commitment to
provide adequate resources in the future, the auditing and
withdrawal mechanism in the Subpart E regulation would allow EPA
to withdraw approval, thus providing protection against a State's
failure to continue to meet the criteria for each future
applicable requirement of section 112.
The delegation mechanism that a State may use to assume
delegation of a Federal section 112 standard as promulgated is a
matter of State law. Outlined below are a few mechanisms that a
State may be able to use depending on its own State law.
5.1.2.a Automatic Delegation
Automatic delegation refers to a process where agencies assume
responsibility for the implementation and enforcement of current
and future section 112 standards without additional rulemaking at
the State level. The State must have authority under its own
49
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
State law to accept delegation in this way. : Automatic delegation
is initially accomplished when State agencies request the
authority to implement and enforce all future section 112
standards in its request for approval under section 63.91. Once
this delegation mechanism has been approved under section 63.91,
the EPA will notify the State agencies of the promulgation of
additional standards through an automatic delegation letter.
This letter does not require a response by the State agency and
if no negative response is received within 10 days from the
State, the delegation is final. A notice of automatic delegation
is then published in the Federal Register. This notification
officially delegates the standards to the State based on the
previous request for automatic delegation. The purpose of the
Federal Register notice is to inform the public that the
delegation has taken place and to indicate where a source
notification and other reports should be sent.
5.1.2.b Adoption by Reference
One alternative for those States that do not have authority
under their own State law to accept automatic delegation would be
delegation by reference. Under this procedure, newly promulgated
section 112 standards would be adopted directly into the State
codes by reference to the Federal law. The State would have to
have authority under its own State law to use this mechanism.
This would considerably decrease the administrative and economic
burdens associated with major regulatory changes. Once this
delegation mechanism has been approved under section 63.91, the
EPA will notify the State agencies of the promulgation of
additional standards. The State will send a delegation request
letter from the Governor or his delegated representative. The
EPA will then send a letter delegating the section 112 standard
to the State. This letter does not require a response by the
State agency, and if no negative response is received within 10
days from the State the delegation is final. A notice of
delegation is then issued into the Federal Register which
formally delegates the Federal standard to the State. The
purpose of the Federal Register notice is to inform the public
that the delegation has taken place and to indicate where a
source notification and other reports should be sent.
5.1o2.c Program for Case-bv-Case Delegati
on
In some States, neither automatic delegation nor delegation by
reference may be available to a State agency due to legal or
political constraints such as lack of adequate authority under
State law. In these instances, additional section 112 standards
50
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
must be delegated on a case-by-case basis. This technique for
assuming responsibility of a newly' promulgated section 112
standard entails submitting an additional delegation request,
complete with demonstration of adequate resources and legal
capabilities (as needed), for each new section 112 standard as
well as incorporating the Federal regulations directly into the
State or local regulations.
This mechanism would require public notice and comment for
each delegation. Once this delegation mechanism has been
approved under section 63.91, the EPA will notify the State
agencies of the promulgation of additional standards. The State
will send a delegation request letter from the Governor or his
delegated representative. This request would be subject to
procedural requirements of 5.1.1. The EPA will then send a
letter delegating the section 112 standard to the State. This
letter does not require a response by the State agency, and if no
negative response is received within 10 days from the State, the
delegation is final. A notice of delegation is then issued into
the Federal Register which officially delegates the Federal
standard to the State. The purpose of the Federal Register
notice is to inform the public that the delegation has taken
place and to indicate where a source notification and other
reports should be sent.
5ol«,3 Option for Direct Final Rulemaking
Another procedural streamlining mechanism is the use of direct
final rulemaking, where appropriate, for formal delegations where
there has been no prospective approval like that discussed above.
In the instances where EPA did not expect any adverse comments
upon publication of a notice of approval, the notice could
specify that the approval would become effective in 30 days
unless adverse comments were received. If adverse comments were
received, then the EPA would have to renotice the approval and
provide for a 30-day public comment period. The time and
resources savings from this use of direct final rulemaking would
thus depend on the correctness of the EPA's judgement regarding
whether or not adverse comments would be submitted.
5.1.4 Option for Implementation Agreements
Where a Subpart E rulemaking required to delegate a section
112 requirement is not practical (e.g., short time frame before
part 70 approval expected), the EPA can enter into implementation
agreements with a State willing to transfer the effective
workload of such requirement. That is, the less formal
51
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
delegation practices previously allowed under section 112(d) can
be used to contract with the State to perform the technical and
administrative implementation of the requirement (and enforcement
as well if the State has adequate legal authority to enforce in
State court). This approach, while potentially valuable in
several situations would not serve, for example, to replace the
EPA as the point of receipt for required source information. THe
opportunity for transfer under implementation agreements,
however, should not be pursued for section 112 requirements
applicable to sources after they are subject to an approved part
70 permit program.
5.2 Relationship to Part 70 Program Approval
State operating permit programs are the mechanism through
which most 112 requirements will be implemented. At this time,
all major sources (i.e. have the potential to emit 10 tons per
year of any HAP or 25 tons per year of any combination of HAP)
must receive a part 70 operating permit. This permit must assure
compliance by the source with all applicable requirements of the
Act, including those contained in section 112.
In order to put an approved part 70 operating permits program
in place in a State, the State is obligated to incorporate all
section 112 applicable requirements into permits and to assume
the primary responsibility to enforce these requirements for all
major sources. The EPA therefore considers the approval of the
State operating permit program under part 70 an excellent
opportunity to facilitate simultaneous EPA approval of the State
program under section 112(1) to the extent that it applies to
part 70 sources, especially where the State merely intends to
implement section 112 requirements as they are promulgated by
EPA. Both EPA approval actions are necessary before the State
can begin to issue part 70 permits that incorporate Federal
section 112 standards, but the demonstration addressing section
112(1) in most instances can be extremely brief and can largely
rely on the demonstrations required for part 70 approval. That
is, the part 70 approval will consider essentially the same
approval criteria with respect to legal authority and resource
adequacy required to be met under section 112(1)(5), and will
provide an adequate opportunity for oversight of future State
actions to implement and enforce section 112 requirements for
part 70 sources. Because Title V approval is conditioned on a
State's ability to implement and enforce all. applicable section
112 requirements for sources subject to the title V program, EPA
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
will automatically treat the request for approval under title V
as a request for approval of a program under section 112(1) for
section 112 requirements.
The approval of a part 70 program transfers to the State the
responsibility to implement and enforce applicable NESHAP and
NSPS standards at all part 70 sources, with the exception of non-
major sources qualifying for exemption under section 70.3(c)(2).
The part 70 approval thus has an effect similar to an agreement
for automatic delegation, in that it is preconditioned on the
States ability and willingness to implement and enforce section
112 standards at sources subject to the part 70 permit program.
The EPA will presume that in light of the required demonstration
and/or commitments required for part 70 approval, a State will
automatically implement each new requirement in accordance with
the State's implementation schedule to incorporate the Federal
section 112 standard expeditiously into the part 70 permit. The
EPA may request a review of individual State actions to ensure
that the needed legal authority and/or technical capabilities are
in place at the State level in time for their use in the part 70
permit process. Such evaluations should be limited to the
exceptional case where the EPA has strong reasons to believe that
legal and/or resource problems exist. Thus, the presumption is
that the State will implement the Federal section 112
requirements as promulgated and adopt any new authority at the
State level needed to assure timely inclusion as applicable in
part 70 permits in order to maintain its part 70 approval.
The procedural steps necessary before a State may incorporate
a Federally promulgated standard into the part 70 permit will
vary as a matter of State law as discussed in the previous
section. A State may have mechanisms available to satisfy part
70 requirements that do not involve a formal delegation from EPA
for section 112 requirements. For instance, State law may allow
incorporation of a Federal standard directly into the part 70
permit without any interim steps to promulgate the standard
through rulemaking or to seek formal delegation of the standard
from EPA.
In some cases, it may be necessary for a State to request
formal delegation of the Federal standard in order for the State
to have authority for incorporation into the permit. Transfer of
authority in these situations can occur through an agreement for
automatic delegation or by a separate delegation agreement for
each specific source category.
53
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
6.0 Section 63.92 of Subpart E
Approval for adjustments to a Federal section 112 rule
This approval option is intended to be exercised by a State
seeking approval of a rule that is substantially similar in form
to a Federal section 112 rule, but incorporates specified
changes, or adjustments that make the State rule unequivocally no
less stringent than the Federal rule. This will normally be the
case when a State rule has been developed using an existing
Federal rule or proposal as a basis. It is not the EPA's intent
that this option would be invoked for approval of State rules
where any sort of involved analysis would be required in order
for the EPA to determine that the adjusted State rule was no less
stringent than the Federal section 112 rule.
This option is administratively simple, but only the pre-
approved list of adjustments discussed in this Chapter will
qualify. Approval of a pre-approved adjustment will not require
an additional public comment period as the other two options will
as long as the State rule has undergone adequate public notice
and comment at the State level. However, if the State does not
have an approved part 70 program or if this is the State's
initial submittal under Subpart E then the State will have to
follow the procedural requirements under section 63.91 which
includes a Federal public notice and comment period.
This chapter discusses both the procedural requirements and
the approval criteria that must be met for a Subpart E submittal
under option section 63.92.
6.1 Procedural Requirements
Please note that if a State's first submittal for Subpart E is
under approval option section 63.92 and a State does not have an
approved part 70 program, then the State must go through the
procedural requirements under section 63.91 (discussed in
Chapter 4) which includes a Federal public notice and comment
period and a 180-day EPA approval/disapproval review period.
Once a State has an approved part 70 program or has submitted a
Subpart E application through the procedural requirements of
section 63.91 then the State will be able to utilize the 90-day
approval/disapproval process described below.
For a State's subsequent request for delegation of authority
pursuant to Subpart E under approval option section 63.92, the
Regional Administrator must follow the procedures outlined below.
54
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
1. If the Regional Administrator finds that the approval criteria
for section 63.91 and the criteria for section 63.92 are met,
the State rule will be approved by the Regional Administrator,
published in the Federal Register and incorporated, directly
or by reference, under Subpart A and under the subpart
containing the otherwise applicable Federal rule, without
additional notice and opportunity for comment. State ARP
programs (Chapter 9) will be incorporated under part 68.
2. If the Regional Administrator finds that any one of the State
adjustments to the Federal rule is in any way ambiguous with
respect to the stringency of applicability, the stringency of
the level of control, or the stringency of the compliance and
enforcement measures for any affected source or emission
point, the Regional Administrator will disapprove the State
rule. The State may submit its rule through another approval
option.
3. Within 90 days of receiving a complete request for approval
under section 63.92, the Regional Administrator will either
approve or disapprove the State rule.
6«2 Approval Criteria
Any request for Subpart E approval under option section 63.92
must meet all of the criteria of section 63.92, as discussed in
this section, as well as the common approval criteria in
section 63.91 (discussed in Chapter 4) before approval may be
granted. For section 112(r), the requirements of section 63.95
must also be met.
1. A demonstration that the public within the State has had
adequate notice and opportunity to submit written comment on
the State rule.
Each State rule for which a State seeks approval must have
undergone rulemaking at the State level that included
public participation equivalent to that required at the
Federal level. This includes at least a 30 day public
comment period.
2. A demonstration that each State adjustment to the Federal rule
individually results in requirements that:
(i) are unequivocally no less stringent than the otherwise
55
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
applicable Federal section 112 rule: with respect to
applicability.
The State rule or program must cover each source
covered by the otherwise applicable Federal rule at
least as stringently.
(ii) are unequivocally no less stringent than the otherwise
applicable Federal rule with respect to level of
control for each affected source and emission point.
Since under this approval option there is no additional
Federal public notice and comment prior to approval,
there can be no question regarding stringency of a
State rule submitted. Therefore, to the extent that
there are specific Federal requirements for individual
emission points, a State rule must match or exceed
stringency at each regulated emission point.
(iii) are unequivocally no less stringent than the otherwise
applicable Federal rule with respect to compliance and
enforcement measures for each affected source and
emission point.
Since under this approval option there is no additional
Federal public notice and comment prior to approval,
there can be no question regarding stringency of a
State rule submitted. Therefore, to the extent that
there are specific Federal compliance and enforcement
measures for individual emission points, a State rule
must match or exceed stringency for each regulated
emission point.
(iv) assure compliance by every affected source no later
than would be required by the otherwise applicable
Federal rule.
However, it is possible for a State to grant additional
time for sources to come into compliance with the
approved State rule. In its submittal to the EPA for
approval, a State could set an absolute date for
approval or establish a certain period to achieve
compliance once a State rule or program is approved.
If a State chooses to provide such flexibility,
affected sources must be in compliance with the
underlying Federal rule and any specified compliance
timeframes in the interim period.
56
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
3. State adjustments to Federal section 112 rules which may be
part of an approved rule under this option ares
(i) lowering a required emission rate or de minimis level,
For example, a Federal de minimis level for a certain
HAP is 5 tons/yr and the State rule wants to lower that
de minimis level to 1 ton/yr.
(ii) adding a design, work practice, operational standard,
emission rate or other such requirement.
For example, the Federal standard does not require
sources to keep the lids closed on their tanks and the
State rule wants to add an additional requirement for
keeping lids closed.
(iii) increasing a required control efficiency.
For example, the Federal standard requires a 95%
control efficiency and the State rule wants to require
a 99% control efficiency.
(iv) increasing the frequency of required reporting,
testing, sampling or monitoring.
For example, the Federal rule requires a source to
report semi-annually and the State wants to require
quarterly reporting.
(v) adding to the amount of information required for
records or reports.
For example, the State wants additional information in
reports concerning fuel use and the Federal standard
does not require this information.
(vi) decreasing the amount of time to come into compliance.
For example, the Federal rule allows a source three
years to come into compliance and the State rule wants
to require compliance in two years.
(vii) subjecting additional emission points or sources within
a source category to control requirements
For example, the proposed Federal standard does not
57
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
require controls for Group 2 emission points and the
State wants to require controls for the Group 2
emission points.
(viii) any adjustments allowed in a specific section 112 rule.
For example, a Federal standard may allow the State
additional adjustments to be used only for that
particular regulation.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
7.0 Section 63.93 of Subpart E
Approval for a State rule or State authorities which substitute
for a Federal section 112 Rule
This approval option is intended to be exercised by a State
seeking approval of a State rule or authority that would
substitute for a Federal rule that did not match any of the
approval adjustments under option section 63.92 discussed in
Chapter 6. This might be the case when a State submits an
authority that differs significantly in form. In the case of
section 112(r), the State rule must be no less stringent than the
Federal Accidental Release Prevention requirements. Once
approved, the State rule would substitute for the Federal rule.
This approval option requires a detailed demonstration of
stringency, but allows States a very wide latitude in the types
of changes they may make. Generally under this option, EPA will
be approving a State rule. Under certain circumstances, EPA may
approve, and make Federally enforceable, a specific application
of broader State authorities.
This chapter discusses both the procedural requirements and
the approval criteria that must be met for a Subpart E submittal
under option section 63.93.
7»1 Procedural Requirements
For a State requesting delegation of authority pursuant to
Subpart E under approval option section 63.93, the Regional
Administrator must meet the procedures outlined below.
1. Within 45 days of receiving a complete request for approval,
the Regional Administrator will seek public comment for a
minimum of 30 days regarding the State request for approval.
The Regional Administrator will require that comments be
submitted concurrently to the State*
2. If, after review of public comments and any State responses to
comments submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30
days of the close of the public comment period, the Regional
Administrator finds that the approval criteria for
section 63.91 and the criteria for section 63.93 are met, the
State rule or authorities will be approved by the Regional
Administrator, published in the Federal Register and
incorporated directly or by reference, under Part 63,
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Subpart A and under the:subpart containing the otherwise
applicable Federal rule. State authorities approved under
section 63.95 (Chapter 9) will be incorporated under part 68.
3. If the Regional Administrator finds that any of the
requirements of section 63.93 or section 63.91 or
section 63.95 (where applicable) have not been met, the
Regional Administrator will disapprove the State authority.
4. Authorities submitted for approval under section 63.93 shall
include either:
(i) A State rule or other requirements enforceable under
State law that would substitute for a Federal section
112 rule.
(ii) (A) The specific permit terms and conditions for the
source or set of sources in the source category for
which the State is requesting approval under this
section, including control requirements and compliance
and enforcement measures, that would substitute for the
permit terms and conditions imposed by the otherwise
applicable Federal section 112 rule for such source or
set of sources.
(B) The Regional Administrator will approve authorities
specified under (ii) (A) only when the State submitting the
request already has an approved program under section
63.94, the Federal standard for the source category has
been promulgated under section 112(h) and the Administrator
has not determined the work practice, design, equipment or
operational requirements submitted by the State to be
inadequate under the provisions of the Federal standard.
5. Within 180 days of receiving a complete request for approval
under section 63.93, the Regional Administrator will either
approve or disapprove the State request.
7.2 Approval Criteria under section 63.93
Any request for Subpart E approval under option section 63.93
must meet all of the criteria of section 63.93 as well as the
common approval criteria in section 63.91 (discussed in chapter
4) and section 63.95 (where applicable) before approval may be
granted. The State shall provide the Regional Administrator with
detailed documentation that the State rule or State authorities
contain or demonstrates
60
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
1. Applicability criteria that are no less stringent than- those
in the respective Federal rule.
The State rule or program must regulate at least as
stringently each source covered by the otherwise applicable
Federal rule.
2. Levels of control and compliance and enforcement measures that
result in emission reductions from each affected source or
accidental release prevention program requirements for each
affected source that are no less stringent than would result
from the otherwise applicable Federal rule.
(
A State may demonstrate that the levels of control and
compliance and enforcement measures result in a greater
emission reduction. When applicable, the State should
demonstrate that the accidental release prevention program
requirements have been met. This issue is discussed
further in the "detailed demonstration" section.
3. A compliance schedule that assures that each affected source
is in compliance no later than would be required by the
otherwise applicable Federal rule.
However, it is possible for a State to grant additional
time for sources to come into compliance with the approved
State rule. In its submittal to the EPA for approval, a
State could set an absolute date for approval or establish
a certain period to achieve compliance once a State rule or
program is approved. If a State chooses to provide such
flexibility, affected sources must be in compliance with
the underlying Federal rule and any specified compliance
timeframes in the interim period.
4. At a minimum, the approved State rule or State authorities
must include the following compliance and enforcement
measures. (For authorities addressing the accidental release
prevention program, minimum compliance and enforcement
provisions are described in section 63.95.)
(i) The approved authorities must include a method for
determining compliance.
(ii) If a standard in the approved State rule or State
authorities is not instantaneous, a maximum averaging
time must be established.
61
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
(iii) The authorities must establish an obligation to
periodically monitor or test for compliance using the
method established under (i) above sufficient to yield
reliable data that are representative of the source's
compliance status.
(iv) The results of all required monitoring or testing must
be reported at least every six months.
7.3 Detailed Demonstration
Approval option section 63.93 requires a State to make a
"detailed demonstration" that the State rule or State
authorities result in as great or greater emission reductions (or
other measure of stringency when appropriate) for each individual
source affected by the Federal section 112 rule.
The State must submit data or information to the Regional
Office demonstrating that its standard is as stringent as the
Federal rule. Because there are so many possible kinds of rules
to evaluate, there is no set form for this detailed
demonstration. The EPA intends to give latitude to the States in
making such demonstrations. However, several guidelines are
offered that limit the latitude that would be extended to the
States in its approved submittals.
A. Except for provisions expressly allowed in the otherwise
applicable Federal section 112 standard, any forms of
averaging across facilities, source categories, or
geographical areas, or any forms of trading across pollutants,
will be disallowed for a demonstration of stringency under
section 63.93. However, if the emission limit for a section
112 standard regulates the total volatile organic HAP
generically, for example, rather than specifying individual
HAP emission limits, then the State standard should achieve an
equal or greater reduction in total volatile organic HAP
emissions provided that the State rule would not lead to an
increase in risk to human health or the environment.
For example. States will not be allowed to average a lower
percent efficiency on an affected source with a higher percent
efficiency on another affected source, even if the overall
emission reductions achieved are greater than the Federal
rule. Any State rule must be demonstrated to be no less
stringent than an otherwise applicable Federal rule for each
affected source rather than, on average, across sources. In
addition, the State cannot offset emission reductions achieved
62
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
by sources not covered by the Federal standard. For example,
non-major sources not covered in the Federal standard cannot
be used to average the emission reductions needed at affected
sources.
Bo In addition, for emission standards, a State should not base
its detailed demonstration on a reduction of overall risk and
other impacts. While a reduction of the impacts of HAP
emissions to human health and the environment are the central
objectives of section 112, Congress based the establishment of
MACT stringency on "reduction of emissions" and "emission
limitation." This then should be the primary basis for
determining the stringency of State rules and programs to be
approved in place of Federal section 112 emission standards.
C. Another limitation on a State is that ambient air limits
cannot be approved as Federally enforceable. However, if an
ambient air limit is converted into an emission limit or
percent efficiency, then that emission limit, which may have
been derived from an ambient air limit, could be approved as
Federally enforceable.
D. The overall focus of the Accidental Release Prevention program
is the reduction of chemical accidents. Reductions in
chemical accidents, unlike routine emissions, cannot be easily
measured. Thus, the test of stringency of a State section
112(r) program will be a comparison of the State program to
the components of the Part 68 program. The State
demonstration will need to verify that all listed regulated
substances are included at or below the assigned threshold
quantities. In addition, the State must show that their
program contains the elements of the risk management program
at the facility level, the submission of risk management plans
(RMPs) to the appropriate authorities, and the provisions for
auditing and updating the plans.
7.3.1 Level of Control
The State has a couple of ways to demonstrate that its
regulations are at least as stringent as the otherwise applicable
Federal rule. For a State who wants its regulation to be at
least as stringent for each requirement which is specified in the
Federal regulation, the State could demonstrate line-by-line
equivalency. For this detailed demonstration, the State
regulation could show that it is at least as stringent as the
Federal regulation for each source and each emission point both
63
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
in level of control and for compliance and enforcement measures.
If a State standard is less stringent for a particular emission
point than the Federal standard, then the State could amend its
State standard to reflect the more stringent Federal emission
limit for that emission point. This detailed demonstration could
be accomplished by specifying each Federal regulation or
requirement and demonstrating that there is a stricter State
requirement that fulfills the Federal requirement. The State's
submittal should make it clear which State requirement satisfies
each Federal requirement. If the Federal requirement is
specified differently, then the State should include an
explanation of why its regulation is more stringent. For this
demonstration, if the State shows that its regulation covers the
same sources and its regulation is at least as stringent for
every emission point both in level of control and compliance and
enforcement measures, then the State will have demonstrated that
its regulation is at least as stringent as the Federal
regulation.
Another way to demonstrate that a State standard is at least
as stringent occurs when the Federal definition of source is
broad. In this case, option section 63.93 allows the State the
flexibility to shift emissions between emission points within the
source category at the same affected source as long as the rule
results in equal or greater emission reductions at each
individual source and there is no trading of HAP, unless
specified in the otherwise applicable Federal standard.
For example, a State rule that has required an innovative
pollution prevention strategy for a source category which
achieves emission reductions that are equal or greater at each
affected source and does not trade across pollutants (unless
allowed in the Federal rule) could be submitted for approval
under section 63.93.
The State must demonstrate that the regulation will be at
least as stringent as the Federal rule for each affected source
using reasonable assumptions and judgement regarding the
characteristics of the sources covered by the regulation. A
worst case analysis may reasonably suffice for such
demonstration(s). The reader should note that worst case
analysis has a specific meaning in section 112(r) which is not
discussed in this section.
A worst case analysis could demonstrate for all relevant
situations that affected sources would always be regulated more
stringently by the State standard than the otherwise applicable
64
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE.DOCUMENT
Federal standard. As a suggested guideline, the State could
consider providing a demonstration that for "worst case"
conditions the State regulation would always be more stringent.
The "worst case" conditions that the State would have to
demonstrate may vary depending on the structure of the Federal
rule, but the State may want to consider the following generic
conditions: applicability, size of source, types of emission
points, location (i.e. low risk area or attainment area), types
of HAP, overall level of control for each facility (i.e., percent
efficiency and amount of emission reductions), types of
compliance and enforcement measures (i.e., temperature
conditions, desorption frequency, work practice procedures,
record-keeping, test methods, averaging times, etc.), actual
versus potential emissions,-requirements for new sources, and
requirements for existing sources.
Please note that these suggestions are very broad and can not
address every specific situation. There may be situations where
the Region will need to require additional conditions to the ones
specified in this guidance. In addition, there may be situations
where a demonstration of one of the specific conditions mentioned
in this guidance will be combined or unnecessary because of the
specific rule that the State standard is replacing.
In order to accomplish this demonstration, the State could
model or estimate emission reductions from several sources that
represent a stratified group which satisfy some or all of the
conditions specified above. This stratified group may vary
depending on the format of the Federal regulation. The State
should provide a written justification of why the stratified
group is a reasonable representation of the types of sources and
"worst case" conditions in the State.
For example, if the Federal regulation is on an emission
reduction basis, the State could show that the actual emission
reductions from the State regulation for both new and existing
sources are at least as great as for the Federal standard for
each source in the stratified group as well as for each
pollutant. In addition, the State would have to include a
justification of why the stratified group selected represents all
of the affected sources in the State.
In the case of the Accidental Release Prevention program the
State must demonstrate that regulated sources would be required
to develop risk management programs and submit RMPs which would
contain all the elements in at least the same detail as the
Federal requirements. In addition, the State rule or program
65
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
must contain an auditing component which would ensure that the
RMPs are reviewed and updated as necessary. The State may.
include additional detection and correction requirements such as
monitoring, record keeping, reporting, training, vapor recovery,
secondary containment, or other design, equipment, work practice
or operational requirements which they can demonstrate to be more
stringent than the Federal section 112(r) requirements.
7.3.2 Minimum Compliance Provisions for Detailed
Demonstrations
The EPA will be promulgating enhanced monitoring rules under
40 CFR Part 64 which will apply to all existing Act regulations
if the facility satisfies the major source definition specified
in the enhanced monitoring provisions. The EPA is also required
to incorporate enhanced monitoring into all new rules promulgated
after the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. This requirement would
also apply to all substitute rules submitted under section 63.93.
Therefore, all monitoring requirements submitted as part of a
State rule that substitutes for a Subpart E rule must qualify as
enhanced monitoring. This means that the monitoring must be
capable of detecting deviations with sufficient reliability and
timeliness to determine if compliance with applicable emission
limitations or standards is continuous. Furthermore, monitoring
must provide data that can be used as evidence of a violation,
and that is directly enforceable.
The goal of enhanced monitoring is to assure that the
emissions reductions intended by regulations are in fact
achieved. Consistent with Section 114(a) of the Clean Air Act,
source owners or operators have the burden of demonstrating that
each emission unit remains in compliance with all applicable
standards. States will have some flexibility in designing
enhanced monitoring requirements, for individual regulations.
These monitoring options include everything from continuous
emission monitoring system (CEMS) to periodic monitoring of
parameters, to the maintenance of records, depending on the
standard and the particular emission unit covered. However,
States must be able to establish that the monitoring requirements
are capable of determining compliance with the applicable
standards.
It is important to distinguish between continuous compliance
and continuous monitoring. In order to demonstrate continuous
compliance, a source need not record data on a continuous,
instantaneous basis. For all rules, monitoring frequency must be
based on the averaging time of the applicable limitation or
66
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
standard, and the likely variability of potential emissions from
a particular emissions unit. If the potential variability is
high, monitoring must be done frequently. If the potential
variability is low, monitoring may be done less frequently at
regular intervals. What is essential is that each State rule
require monitoring to be performed frequently enough to allow the
owner or operator to certify compliance with the applicable
standard for each averaging period.
Thus, for approval as a Subpart E substitution, a State rule
does not need to require a GEMS. However, the State rule must
contain an appropriate alternative to enable sources to certify
compliance. The alternative may involve the monitoring of
specific parameters to demonstrate that a control device is
operating properly and achieving the intended emissions
reduction. In all cases where parameter monitoring is used, a
correlation of monitoring data to emissions must be performed.
Moreover, any alternative limits established through such a
performance test must be quantifiable, accountable, practically
and Federally enforceable, and based on replicable procedures.
Where an emissions unit is subject to design, equipment,
operational or work practice requirements, monitoring that
provides documentation of the particular equipment or work
practice program would satisfy the terms of enhanced monitoring.
For example, standards for fugitive emissions (equipment leaks)
might require a leak detection and repair program. Enhanced
monitoring in this case would be met by recording the monitoring
results, identifying any exceedances, and documenting what
repairs were undertaken and when. For certain other standards,
record keeping would constitute enhanced monitoring. Where the
standard is a straightforward ban on the use of a particular raw
material, a source may need only to maintain purchase orders to
demonstrate that none of the banned material was used.
For additional examples of enhanced monitoring, States may
refer to EPA's Enhanced Monitoring Reference Document being
developed in conjunction with the Part 64 regulation. This
document is intended to provide a constantly evolving compendium
of monitoring systems and procedures that can be used to satisfy
enhanced monitoring requirements.
Frequency of record keeping, as well as the types of
information to be recorded, will depend on the type of monitoring
required under the specified standard. As with monitoring,
record keeping should also be based on the averaging period and
the likely variability of emissions.
67
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
In accordance with section 63.10(b)(l) of the proposed General
Provisions, a State rule must require that sources maintain
records of all required monitoring data and support information
for a period of at least 5 years. This 5-year retention period
is consistent with the statute of limitations, enabling EPA to
use its enforcement authority for the full 5 years.
In order for a State rule to be approved as a substitution for
a Federal regulation under part 63, the reporting requirements
must be sufficient to allow the EPA to respond to any compliance
problems in a timely manner. Consistent with section 63.10(d) of
the proposed General Provisions, State rules must require sources
to submit reports, and start-up, shutdown, or malfunction
reports. These reports shall be viewed as minimum reporting
requirements. In addition, any State standard approved under
Subpart E must contain all of the reporting provisions in the
relevant 112(d) standard. For the Accidental Release Prevention
program, the State should refer to the Subpart E rule.
Most MACT standards will require quarterly reports of
monitoring, and State rules must be consistent with these
requirements. States, however, would also have the option of
including a provision such as section 63.10(e)(3)(ii) of the
proposed General Provisions, whereby the frequency of reporting
could be reduced from quarterly (or more frequently) to
semiannually following 1 full year in which reports demonstrate
that the source was continually in compliance with the relevant
standard.
7.4 State Authorities
In response to numerous comments which expresses concern about
the inflexibility that the "form of the standard imposes", the
EPA in the final Subpart E rule expanded section 63.93 to allow a
State to submit broader State authorities for a specific
application under certain conditions. The State must already
have a State program approved through section 63.94, before a
State can submit broad authorities through section 63.93.
In addition, only under the following conditions may a State
submit broad authorities through section 63.93. The conditions
occur when EPA writes a work practice, equipment, design or
operational standard (in other words, when the EPA does not write
a standard based on performance, like control efficiency or an
emission rate) and when such a Federal standard does not address
a State work practice, equipment, design or operational standard
as either meeting or failing to meet the Federal standard. Under
68
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
these conditions the flexibility of,Section section 63.94 would
not allow the State standard to be the basis for the permit.
Under the conditions discussed above/ the EPA is not requiring
the submittal of a source-category-specific rule for approval
under option section 63.93. Instead a State may submit broader
authorities which allow it to regulate the source category in
question, a specific description of how those authorities will
affect (i.e., the controls that are required by application of
those authorities and the specific permit terms and conditions)
and the authorities which will assure adequate compliance and
enforcement per this subpart and part 70. If the EPA grants
approval in such a case, it will result in Federal enforceability
only for the specific application of the State authorities to a
single source category.
For example, a State might have a single regulation that
assesses risk at facilities that emit hazardous air pollutants as
defined in section 112(b) of the Act and based on estimates of
risk, requires specific emission rates or specific controls at
those facilities. This regulation might apply to a wide range of
source categories in the State. If such a State initially
received approval under section 63.94 for a source category which
is later regulated via Federal equipment standards, approval
under section 63.94 might provide very little flexibility to the
State to require different types of equipment instead of
otherwise applicable Federal requirements. This is especially
problematic when a State seeks to require innovative controls not
evaluated at the time of Federal standard promulgation. If a
State can demonstrate to the EPA, via the process described in
section 63.93 that such controls resulted ,in emission reductions
for all sources in the source category as great or greater than
the Federal standard would achieve, the EPA is willing to
consider a request to approve such controls as Federally
enforceable instead of the otherwise applicable Federal standard.
However, only the controls and compliance measures that were
approved through section 63.93 in addition to the controls and
compliance measures specified in the otherwise applicable Federal
standard would be allowed in the permit for that source category.
The State would not be allowed to incorporate any control and
compliance measures that had not been approved through
section 63.93.
Approval under section 63.93 has been broadened to allow the
State to request approval of a limited application (i.e., a
different piece of equipment for a source category) of its
general air toxics regulation as it applies to a single source
69
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
category. To do so, the State needs to, meet the requirements of
section 63.93 which calls for, among other things a detailed
engineering analysis of emission reductions that would result
from the Federal and State scenarios. Any resulting approval
would make the State authorities Federally enforceable only
insofar as they relate to the single application of authorities
for a single source category for which they were submitted.
7.4.1 Detailed Demonstration of State Authority
As discussed above, the State Authority approval under
section 63.93 will also require a "detailed demonstration." This
section allows a State under the conditions described above to
submit an alternative piece of equipment and compliance measures
for a particular source category. In addition, the State will
have to specify the exact permit terms and conditions. In order
to provide a detailed demonstration that an alternative piece of
equipment and compliance measures are at least as stringent as
the otherwise applicable Federal standard, the State could
consider collecting, verifying and submitting to the Regional
Office the following information:
1. Diagrams, as appropriate, illustrating the emission control
technology and its operation.
2. If possible, information quantifying the emission reductions
achieved by the alternative emission control technology. For
example, emissions with and without the alternative emission
control technology and compare to the emission reductions
achieved by the required technology.
3. Information on other relevant measures of comparison. For
example, the dry cleaning standard required information
regarding the solvent mileage achieved with and without the
candidate control technology.
4. Identification of maintenance requirements and parameters to
monitor to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the
alternative emission control technology.
5. Explanation of why this information is considered accurate and
representative of both the short-term and the long-term
performance of the alternative emission control technology.
6. Explanation of why this information (if specific to one test
of the alternative technology) can be extrapolated to other
similar sources within the source category.
70
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Zf relevant, information on the cross-media impacts (to water
and solid waste) of the alternative emission control
technology and demonstration that the cross-media impacts are
less than or equal to the cross-media impacts of the otherwise
applicable Federal standard.
71
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
8.0 Section 63.94 of Subpart E
Approval of a generic State program for
Program which substitutes for some or all
Federal section 112 Emission Standards
This delegation option is for approval of a generic State
program that substitutes for some or all Federal section 112
emission standards. Under this option, a State program may be
approved in place of specific emission standards and requirements
established under sections 112(d), (f), or (h). This option can
not be used for Federal rules that are not emission standards
like section 112(g). However, emission standards promulgated
under sections 112(k), 112(m), 112(n), 112(c)(6) or any other
section which requires an emission standard could be approved
under this option. For approval, the State must make a number of
legally-binding commitments, which are discussed below.
801 Procedural Requirements
For a State requesting delegation of authority pursuant to
Subpart E under option section 63.94, the Regional Administrator
must follow the procedures outlined below.
lo Within 45 days of receiving a complete request for approval,
the Regional Administrator will seek public comment on the
State request for approval. The Regional Administrator will
require that comments be submitted concurrently to the States.
2. If, after review of public comments and any State responses to
comments submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30
days of the close of the public comment period, the Regional
Administrator finds that the approval criteria for
section 63.91 and the approval criteria for section 63.94 are
met, the State program will be approved by the Regional
Administrator. The approved legally-binding State commitments
and reference to all documents submitted under section 63.91
will be published in the Federal Register and incorporated
directly or by reference under subpart A.
3. If the Regional Administrator finds that any of the
requirements of section 63.94 or section 63.91 have not been
met, the Regional Administrator will disapprove the State
program.
72
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
4. Within 180 days of receiving a complete request for approval
under section 63.94, the Regional Administrator will either
approve or disapprove the State request.
8.2 Approval Criteria under section 63.94
Any request for Subpart E approval under option section 63.94
must meet all of the criteria of section 63.94 as well as the
common criteria in section 63.91 (discussed in Chapter 4) before
approval may be granted.
The State shall provide the Regional Administrator with:
1. A reference to all specific sources or source categories
listed pursuant to subsection 112(c) for which the State is
seeking authority to implement and enforce standards or
requirements under section 63.94.
The State must list all source categories for which it
plans to use this approval option. The initial list of
source categories was published in the Federal Register on
July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576).
2. A legally-binding commitment adopted through State law that,
after approval:
(i) For each source subject to Federal section 112 emission
standards or requirements for which approval is sought,
part 70 permits shall be issued or revised by the State
in accordance with procedures established in part 70
and in accordance with the schedule submitted under
section 63.91 assuring expeditious compliance by all
sources
(ii) All such issued or revised part 70 permits shall
contain conditions that:
(A) Reflect applicability criteria no less stringent than
those in the otherwise applicable Federal section 112
standards or requirements.
The State rule or program must cover each source
covered by the otherwise applicable Federal rule
at least as stringently.
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
(B) Require levels of control for each source and emission
point no less stringent than those contained in the
otherwise applicable Federal standards or requirements.
Since under this option there is only a 45-day EPA
review of the part 70 permit, there can be no
question regarding stringency of a State rule "
submitted. Therefore, to the extent that there
are specific Federal requirements for individual
emission points, a State rule must match or exceed
stringency at each regulated emission point in the
same form as the Federal standard.
(C) Require compliance and enforcement measures for each
source and emission point no less stringent than those
in the otherwise applicable Federal standards or
requirements.
Since under this option there is only a 45-day EPA
review of the part 70 permit, there can be no
question regarding stringency of a State rule
submitted. Therefore, to the extent that there
are specific Federal requirements for individual
emission points, a State rule must match or exceed
stringency at each regulated emission point in the
same form as the Federal standard.
(D) Express levels of control and compliance and
enforcement measures in the same form and units of
measure as the otherwise applicable Federal standards
and requirements.
(E) Assure compliance by each affected source no later than
would be required by the otherwise applicable Federal
standard or requirement.
However, it is possible for a State to grant
additional time for sources to come into
compliance with the approved State rule. In its
submittal to the EPA for approval, a State could
set an absolute date for approval or establish a
certain period to achieve compliance once a State
rule or program is approved. If a State chooses
to provide such flexibility, affected sources must
be in compliance with the underlying Federal rule
and any specified compliance timeframes in the
interim period.
74
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
8.3 Form of the Standard
This delegation option requires a State to make a legally-
binding commitment that it will express all relevant emission or
other limitations or requirements resulting from the State's
program, in 40 CFR part 70 permits for all affected sources in
the "form of the federal standard." Any such permit conditions
would have to reflect emission or other limitations that would be
no less stringent than those that would result from the otherwise
applicable Federal standard. In addition, compliance and
enforcement measures must also be in the same form and units of
measure.
8.3.1 How does a State demonstrate a no less stringent level
of control in the "form of the Federal standard?"
Typically Federal emission standards will express a level of
control in terms of a numerical emission limit or percent
reduction that must be attained by an affected source. In such
situations, a State with a program approval under section 63.94
shall express in the applicable permit a level of control,
resulting from its own program that is in the same form and
metric as in the Federal standard (i.e., in terms of the same
emission limit, level or reduction, including the same units of
measure).
As an example, a certain Federal emission standard may require
an emission limit of 5 pounds per hour of a HAP from a particular
piece of equipment. In this example, the State would have to
express an emission limit resulting from its own program in the
same units, i.e., pounds per hour. In this case, the actual
limit would have to be 5 pounds per hour or less in order to be
no less stringent than the Federal standard.
Another example might be if a Federal standard required a 99
percent reduction in a pollutant from a particular emission
point, the State would have to express an emission limit in the
respective part 70 permit that achieved 99 or greater percent
reduction from that emission point to be no less stringent and to
express the requirements of its program in the form of the
Federal standard.
Conversely, if the Federal emission limit is 5 pounds per
hour, a part 70 permit requirement for 99 percent reduction would
not be expressed on the form of the Federal standard, even if a
State could show that a 99 percent reduction resulted in an
75
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
emission rate less than 5 pounds per hour. In such a case, the
State would need to convert the percent reduction to pounds per
hour and write the pounds per hour number into the permit.
An example of how a State might translate a risk-based or
ambient concentration standard to the form of a Federal
technology-based standard, might proceed as follows: if a State
standard were expressed as a concentration not to be exceeded at
the source fenceline, the State could determine, perhaps through
dispersion modeling, an emission rate that could not be exceeded.
This emission rate could then be expressed by an emissions
reduction requirement that could be met using a certain type of
control equipment. The emission reduction requirement could be
directly comparable and translatable to the form of the
corresponding requirement under the Federal Standard. Therefore,
for this example, the more stringent emission rate in the form of
the Federal standard would become the Federally enforceable limit
for the facility. Note that if the State's analysis concluded
that no control equipment was required because the source did not
exceed the risk-based standard, the Federal requirements would
nonetheless apply, that is, the source still would be required to
install control technology or meet the otherwise applicable
conditions required by section 112.
In situations where the final Federal standard does not
address the equipment, design, work practice or operational
requirements that a State standard wants to require in lieu of
the specified Federal requirements and the Federal rule does not
specify an emission limit, a State will not be able to directly
express an alternative piece of equipment and compliance measures
in the same form as the Federal standard. EPA has broadened
approval under section 63.93 to allow a State to request approval
of a limited application of its general air toxics regulations as
it applies to a single source category (e.g., an alternative
piece of equipment and compliance measures for the dry cleaning
standard). This expanded use of option section 63.93 was
discussed in more detail in chapter 7.
8.3.2 How does a State demonstrate no less stringent
compliance measures in the "form of the Federal
standard?"
Compliance measures refer to the requirements of a Federal
standard relating, for example, to monitoring, test methods and
procedures, record keeping, reporting and compliance
certification. Compliance measures are as important as the level
of control in effecting the intended emission reductions and
76
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
therefore must also be no less stringent than and expressed in
the form of the Federal standard within the permit.
Compliance measures are not always expressed in terms of
numerical limits, as is typically the case for levels of control.
Therefore, there is less latitude for demonstrating that one set
of compliance measures is no less stringent than another.
Similarly, there is little latitude for demonstrating that an
alternative set of compliance measures is expressed in the same
form as another.
Consequently, under the section 63.94, States will have to
incorporate compliance measures that largely reflect the
compliance measures specified in the otherwise applicable Federal
standard. If alternative sets of compliance measures are
specified within the Federal standard, or within delegation
manuals, any of the specified alternatives could be incorporated
into the respective permit by the State and meet the criterion
under section 63.94 that compliance measures must be no less
stringent and expressed in the form of the Federal standard. For
example, a particular standard may specify one set of compliance
measures if a source employs a carbon adsorber, but specify
another set of compliance measures if the source employs a flare
on the same affected source. In such an instance, the set of
compliance conditions that correspond appropriately with the
particular control device employed should be incorporated into
the permit.
However, in situations where the final Federal standard does
not address the equipment, design, work practice or operational
requirements that a State standard wants to require in lieu of
the specified Federal requirements and the Federal rule does not
specify an emission limit, a State may request approval of a
limited application of its general air toxics regulations as it
applies to a single source category (e.g., an alternative piece
of equipment and compliance measures for the dry cleaning
standard). This expanded use of section 63.93 was discussed in
more detail in chapter 7.
In addition, if the Federal rule is not a work practice,
equipment, design or operational standard (in other words, when
the EPA writes a standard based on performance, like control
efficiency or an emission rate), then the EPA should specify
within the Federal standard general enforcement and compliance
measures that any source could use to demonstrate compliance.
Even though there may be less latitude on how to express the
77
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
compliance and enforcement measures, a State should be able to
use the more general compliance provisions if specific
technologies are not specified.
78
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
9.0 Section 63.95 of Subpart E
Approval of a State
Accidental Release Prevention Program
This Chapter discusses the procedural requirements and the
approval criteria that must be met for a State section 112(r)
program under section 63.95. Approval of a State Accidental
Release Prevention (ARP) program can occur in two ways,
delegation of the Federal requirements without changes or
development of a State ARP program that is different but at least
as stringent as the Federal program using the options outlined in
section 63.92 (discussed in chapter 6) and section 63.93
(discussed in chapter 7). A State may not receive delegation for
the ARP program that differs from the Federal requirements prior
to promulgation of the list of regulated substances and risk
management program rules pursuant to section 112(r). In order to
receive approval and delegation for an ARP program which differs
from the Federal section 112(r) rules, a State submittal must
meet the approval criteria in section 63.91, either section 63.92
or section 63.93 and section 63.95. The requirements of
section 63.91 and section 63.95 must be met for the approval of
State ARP programs which do not differ from the Federal
requirements.
For additional guidance on the delegation of section 112(r),
States and Regions should consult the draft document entitled
"Guidance for the Delegation of a State Accidental Release
Prevention Program under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act."
9.1 Procedural Requirements
A State seeking delegation of a different State section 112(r)
program should follow the procedures set forth in chapter 4 as
well as the approval criteria established in either chapter 6
regarding rule adjustment under section 63.92 or the approval
criteria in chapter 7 regarding substituting a State rule or
State authorities under section 63.93 depending upon which
approval option the State plans on utilizing. A State seeking
delegation of the Federal section 112(r) rule without changes
must meet the requirements of section 63.91 and section 63.95.
9.2 Approval Criteria under section 63.95
1. A demonstration of the State's authority and resources to
implement and enforce regulations which are at least as
stringent as regulations promulgated under section 112(r) that
79
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
specify substances, related thresholds and a risk management
program,
2, Procedures fors
(i) -Registration of stationary sources, as defined in
section 112(r)(2)(C) of the Act, which clearly
identifies the State entity to receive the
registration.
(ii) Receiving and reviewing risk management plans.
(iii) Making available to the public any risk management plan
submitted to the State pursuant to provisions specified
in the section 112(r) which are consistent with section
114(c) of the Act.
(iv) Providing technical assistance to subject sources,
including small businesses.
3. A demonstration of the State's authority to enforce all
accidental release prevention requirements including a risk
management plan auditing strategy.
4o A description of the coordination mechanisms the State
implementing agency will use with:
(i) The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board,
particularly during accident investigation.
(ii) The State Emergency Response Commission, and the Local
Emergency Planning Committees.
(iii) The air permitting program with respect to the
interface of the sources subject to both section 112(r)
of the Act and permit requirements under part 70.
Under this section, a State may request delegation for a complete
or partial program. A partial Accidental Release Prevention
program must include the approval criteria discussed above.
80
-------
-------
SUBPART E ENABLING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
10.0 PERIODIC REVIEWS
[TO BE ADDED IN THE NEXT VERSION]
81
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
DEFINITIONS
Applicability criteria means the regulatory criteria used to
define all emission points within all affected sources subject to
a specific section 112 rule.
Approval means a determination by the Administrator that a
State rule or program meets the criteria of section 63.91 and the
additional criteria of either section 63.92, section 63.93 or
section 63.94, where appropriate. For accidental release
prevention programs, the criteria of section 63.95 must also be
met.
Compliance and enforcement measures means requirements
within a rule or program relating to compliance and enforcement,
including but not necessarily limited to monitoring, test methods
and procedures, recordkeeping, reporting, compliance
certification, inspection, entry, sampling or accidental release
prevention oversight.
Level of control means the degree to which a rule or program
requires a source to limit emissions or to employ design,
equipment, work practice, operational, accident prevention or
other requirements or techniques (including a prohibition of
emis s ions) for:
(l)(i) each hazardous air pollutant, if individual
pollutants are subject to emission limitations, and
(ii) the aggregate total of hazardous air pollutants, if the
aggregate grouping is subject to emission limitations, provided
that the rule or program would not lead to an increase in risk to
human health or the environment; and
(2) each substance regulated under section 112(r).
Local agency means a local air pollution control agency or,
for the purposes of section 63.95, any local agency or entity
having responsibility for preventing accidental releases which
may occur at a source regulated under section 112(r).
Program means, for the purposes of an approval under section
63.94, a collection of State statutes, rules or other
requirements which limits or will limit the emissions of
hazardous air pollutants from affected sources.
Stringent or stringency. means the degree of rigor,
strictness or severity a statute, rule, emission standard or
requirement imposes on an affected source as measured by the
quantity of emissions, or as measured by parameters relating to
rule applicability and level of control, or as otherwise
determined by the Administrator.
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
HEADQUARTERS REVIEWING OFFICES
OAPQS
Sheila Milliken
US EPA
MD-13
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
OE
Elise Hoerath
US EPA
Mail Code 2242
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
osc
Judy Tracy
US EPA
Mail Code 2344
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
CEPP
Craig Matthissen
US EPA
Mail Code 5101
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
-------
-------
[TO BE ADDED]
APPENDIX C
FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR
APPROVAL OF STATE PROGRAMS AND
DELEGATION OF FEDERAL AUTHORITIES
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
STATUTORY LANGUAGE OF SECTION 112 ,(1)
-------
-------
3 5
*a8^
<< a* y
£.»
eSglNsreBt
S i O ®
o-o
1° C
B/-
3 g g-
P. 5 3
W — *•* *rf M J3* ^ £5 ^^ "T B M. CO 52 3 M
I
ifg
i5
IB-
09
B.Q.
o-«
I E^M.<< 3 O M
c-.?*»S'35
;ill^il||ll
S 0 3.3 o * «
g •» * try;
S.yci ^s-w 0.3.1
3B"sT!-S jSggSFa
ji;iliMj-i
SHeJau
&9 f^||if|
S?rAslg*frf
.l?ll|ii
IllfllUfl-!
I
ce
e
?fPH
-------
-------
2,=
%
en
!Ȥ a
C _ 5 G
c
Q
Q.«! o
*! 2
~'0 K
0.6 S
3 g* o
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
AND REGIONAL APPROVAL CHECKLIST
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
GENERAL INFORMATION 7
PART 1. GENERAL INFORMATION
1.1 Agency Information
Date:
Official Agency Name:
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Fax:
Agency Contact:
Contact Information:
(if different from above)
1.2 Title V Information
Please give date and Federal Register citation for the final approval of the State's Title V
Operating Permits Program (if applicable).
1.3 Other 112(1) delegations
Please cite Federal Register notices and dates for any previous 112(1) delegations.
1.4 Delegation option:
Rule Adjustment (Section 63.92)
Rule Substitution (Section 63.93)
Program Substitution (Section 63.94)
Federal Standard with no Changes (Section 63.91)
(for States without approved Title V programs)
1.5 Agency Certification
We, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the information contained in this application is
correct to the best of our knowledge.
Signature:
Signature:
(State Agency Contact)
(State Agency Director or other highest official)
Date:
Date:
E-l
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUEPART E DELEGATION
COMMON CRITERIA (§63.91)
PART 2. CRITERIA COMMON TO ALL OPTIONS
2.1
2,2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
Provide a written finding by the State Attorney General that the State has the necessary
legal authority to implement and enforce the State rale or program at the time of
approval and to assure compliance by all sources with each applicable section 112 rale,
emission standard, or requirement [§ 63.91(b)(l)].
Provide a copy of all State statutes, regulations and other requirements that contain the
appropriate provisions granting authority to implement and enforce the State rale or
program upon approval [§ 63.91(b)(2)].
Provide a demonstration that the State has adequate resources to implement and enforce
all aspects of the rale or program upon approval [§ 63.91(b)(3)j. This attachment should
include the following:
2.3.1 A narrative description of the scope, structure, coverage, and processes of the
State program or rale.
2.3.2 A description of the organization and structure of the agency or agencies that will
have responsibility for administering the rale or program.
2.3.3 A description of the agency staff who will carry out the State rale or program.
Include the number, occupation, and general duties of the employees, but do not
submit complete job descriptions for every employee carrying out the State
program or rale.
Provide a schedule demonstrating expeditious State implementation of the rale or
program upon approval [§ 63.91(b)(4)].
Provide a plan that assures compliance by all sources subject to the rale or program upon
approval [§ 63.91 (b)(5)]. The plan should include a complete description of the State's
compliance tracking and enforcement program, including but not limited to inspection
strategies.
Provide a demonstration of adequate legal authority to assure compliance with the rale
or program upon approval [§ 63.91(b)(6)]. Applicable State provisions should be cited
demonstrating enforcement authorities that meet the requirements of § 70.11. If
authorities are delegated to a local agency, it must be demonstrated that the State retains
its enforcement authority unless the local agency has authorities that meet § 70.11
requirements.
E-2
-------
-------
PARTS.
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
RULE ADJUSTMENT (§ 63.92)
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL - RULE ADJUSTMENT OPTION
[Note: Skip this section if not seeking approval under this option.]
3.1 This rule adjustment must be one of the adjustments listed hi § 63.92(b)(3). Identify
which of the allowable adjustments is/are being made hi the rule requested for delegation.
3.2 Provide a demonstration that the public within the State has had adequate notice and
opportunity to submit written comment on the State rule [§ 63.92(b)(l)].
3.3 Provide a demonstration that each State adjustment to the Federal rule individually results
in requirements which meet the following. For each of the following, provisions in the
State's rule(s) should be cited, and, if necessary, descriptions of the provisions should
be provided:
3.3.1 The applicability requirements are unequivocally no less stringent than those of
the otherwise applicable Federal rule [§ 63.92(b)(2)(i)].
Citation:
3.3.2 The requirements for level of control for each affected source and emission point
are unequivocally no less stringent than those of the otherwise applicable Federal
rule [§ 63.92(b)(2)(ii)].
Citation:
3.3.3 The compliance and enforcement measures for each affected source and emission
point are unequivocally no less stringent than those of the otherwise applicable
Federal rule [§ 63.92(b)(2)(iii)].
Citation:
3.3.4 The requirements assure compliance by every affected source no later than would
be required by the otherwise applicable Federal rule [§ 63.92(b)(2)(iv)].
Citation:
E-3
-------
-------
4.2
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
RULE SUBSTTTUTION (§ 63.93)
PART 4. APPROVAL OF A STATE RULE OR STATE AUTHORITIES THAT
SUBSTITUTE FOR A SECTION 112 RULE
[Note: Skip this section if not seeking approval under this option.]
4.1 Provide a demonstration that the State authorities contain or demonstrate applicability
criteria that are no less stringent than those in the respective Federal rule [§ 63.93(b)(l)].
As part of this demonstration, cite the State's applicability provisions:
Citation(s):
Provide a demonstration that the State authorities contain or demonstrate levels of control
and compliance and enforcement measures that result in emissions reductions from each
affected source (or accidental release prevention program requirements for each affected
source) which are no less stringent than those that would result from the otherwise
applicable Federal rule [§ 63.93(b)(2)].
As part of this demonstration, cite relevant State compliance and enforcement provisions:
Citation(s):
Provide a demonstration that the State authorities contain or demonstrate a compliance
schedule that assures that each affected source is in compliance no later than would be
required by the otherwise applicable Federal rule [§ 63.93(b)(3)].
If applicable to this demonstration, cite State provisions containing compliance schedules:
Citation:
4.4 Provide a demonstration that the State authorities contain each of the following
compliance and enforcement measures [§ 63.93(b(4)]. Cite State provisions for each:
4.4.1 A method for determining compliance.
Citation:
4.4.2 A maximum averaging tune for any standard in the authorities which is not an
instantaneous standard.
Citation:
4.3
E-4
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
RULE SUBSTITUTION (§ 63.93) (CONTINUED)
4.4.3 An obligation to periodically monitor or test compliance using the method shown
in question 4.4.1 which is sufficient to yield reliable data that are representative
of the source's compliance status.
Citation:
4.4.4 A requirement that the results of all required monitoring and testing be reported
at least every six months.
Citation:
E-5
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
PROGRAM SUBSTITUTION (§ 63.94)
PART 5. APPROVAL OF A STATE PROGRAM THAT SUBSTITUTES FOR
SECTION 112 EMISSION STANDARDS
[Note: Skip this section if not seeking approval under this option.]
5.1
5.2
List all source categories pursuant to subsection 112(c) for which the State is seeking
authority to implement and enforce standards under this section [§ 63.94(b)(l)].
The following legally binding commitments must be made through State Law. [§
63.94(b)(2)]. For each of the following, cite the State provisions which contain the
legally binding commitment, and describe these provisions as necessary.
5.2.1 For each source subject to Federal section 112 emission standards for which
approval is sought, 40 CFR Part 70 permits shall be issued or revised by the State
in accordance with procedures established in part 70 and in accordance with the
schedule established in part 2, question 2.5 of this application assuring
expeditions compliance by all sources.
Citation:
5.2.2 All such issued or revised part 70 permits shall contain conditions that do each
of the following:
5.2.2.1
Reflect applicability criteria no less stringent than those hi the
otherwise applicable Federal standards.
Citation:
5.2.2.2
Require levels of control for each source and emission point no
less stringent than those contained in the otherwise applicable
Federal standards or requirements.
Citation:
5.2.2.3
Require compliance and enforcement measures for each source and
emission point no less stringent than those in the otherwise
applicable Federal standards or requirements.
Citation:
E-6
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION .
PROGRAM SUBSTITUTION (§ 63.94) (CONTINUED). .
5.2.2.4
5.2.2.5
Express levels -of control and compliance, and enforcement
measures in the same form and units of measure as under the
otherwise applicable Federal standard or requirement.
Citation:
Assure compliance by every affected source no later than would be
required by the otherwise applicable Federal standard.
Citation:
E-7
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM (§ 63.95)
PART 6. ADDITIONAL APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR A STATE RULK THAT
ADJUSTS OR SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FEDERAL ACCIDENTAL
RELEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM.
[Notes In addition to this part, part 4 of the application, "Approval of a State
rule or State authorities that substitute for a section 112 rule," must also be
completed.]
6.1 Provide a demonstration of the State's authority and resources to implement and enforce
regulations which are at least as stringent as regulations promulgated under Section
112(r) that specify substances, related thresholds, and a risk management program R
63.95(b)(l)].
6.2. Demonstrate procedures for, and where applicable, cite State rules requiring the
following [§ 63.95(b)(2)]:
6.2.1 Registration of stationary sources, as defined in section 112(r)(2)(C) and
consistent with the requirements of the Act, which clearly identifies the State
entity to receive the registration.
Citation:
6.3
6.2.2 Receiving and reviewing risk management plans.
Citation:
6.2.3 Making available to the public any risk management plan submitted to the State
pursuant to provisions specified in section 112(r) which are consistent with section
114(c) of the Act.
Citation:
6.2.4 Providing technical assistance to subject sources, including small businesses.
Citation:
Demonstrate, and cite applicable State rules providing for, the State's authority to enforce
all accidental release prevention requirements including a risk management plan auditing
strategy [§ 63.95(b)(3)].
E-8
-------
-------
APPLICATION FOR SUBPART E DELEGATION
ACCIDENTAL RELEASE (§. 63.95) (CONTINUED)
6.4 Attach a description of the coordination mechanisms the State implementing agency will
use for coordination with each of the following entities [§ 63.95(b)(4)]: >••- r
6.4.1 The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, particularly during accident
investigation.
6.4.2 The State Emergency Response Commission, and the Local Emergency Planning
Committees.
6.4.3 The air permitting program with respect to the interface of the sources subject to
both section 112(r) of the Act and permit requirements under part 70.
E-9
-------
-------
•a O
3-s
era 3
o.
i-8
a. a.
5"H
era 5-
O- 3
Is-
ff
P-*- *-*•
rp o
-8
3 3
•S "S.
CD g'
H
^ 3
a 2
ff
li"
.£>.
GO
OJ
o
en
S s-
en
TEL
5*
I
o
•s
CD
O.
o
ca
CD
A3 JJJ5
BS g
co 3.
£| «•
re s
CD
5
CD
el
"H.
?T
1
.a
3
§"
-8
••§•
..i
.o
I
I
I
f
n
0
T3
•- -JB
a.
-N) ,— , M
CD sr
-n
o
c
. Q.
.CD X
^ »
-&:
S
a a
o
o
>-t)
r^
cf
«
re
CO
• O
C
3
re
CO
B
13
re"
i
i
,i
ca
**
I
BT
^«
o"
en
a.
&
1
t-*"
3
|
c
o
I
Q
re
re
3
I
•-S
'S
'•3
- o
o
o
•o^
CD
C/3
§
3
CD
ere
I
o
s1
-------
-------
Ki .. ~
«
Assurance of compliance by every affected sourc
otherwise applicable Federal rule?
CD
S
t_O
Compliance and enforcement measures for each
emission point no less stringent?
£+>
emission point no less stringent?
w
"
Requirements for level of control for each affect
8.
CO
U)
Applicability requirements no less stringent?
3'0
2t 2
• e" =
'- § 52.
tratipn that each State adjustment to the Federal rule
illy results in requirements which meet the followini
'"' • i
w »•
Demon
CO
i
v§
s,
1
i
GO
c?
T3
o-
cT
I
cT
o.
1
I
<~*
•^o
« HH
..' CO
Er
^
. CO
O
2t
3*
CO*
0*
1
3^
CB
GO
f
3.
W
3
^^
" d
.: c
* w
ADJUSTMENT OPTION (Section 63.92)
] OS
. [SJ
If authorities are delegated to a local agency, do
retain enforcement authority unless the local age
authorities that meet § 70.11 requirements?
1* . - . •
3 CB
O «"
»< i-f
ON
H~k -
Enforcement authorities that meet the requireme
1
^
O
CD
O
3
en
I
O
s,
s.
CD
cT
era
CO
1
s
"H.
3
S
n
ERIA COMMON TO ALL OPTIONS (CONTINl
§
a
CB
w
?3
CD
1
1
coo
n
o
re
I
-------
-------
NJ —
-U)
, NJ
2. 1 Part 70 permits to be issued or revised b
with procedures established in part 70 an
expeditious compliance schedule?
^^ *^
3" g*
O C/3
O ff
9 ff
Oa
fi3 Nrt«
1 i
§
<^*
s-
**s
CD'
S
4.2 Maximum averaging time for non-instan
Ss
S3
8
c
en
en
2?
Q.
1
en
4. 1 Method for determining compliance?
Q
CD
monstration of each of the following compliance
(W
Q.
1
^J
}*+
d
§
CD
3
2
en
en
•§ 'O
T3 CD
monstration of compliance schedule that assures
licable Federal rule?
Q
&3
f-\
8
3
O
CD"
0
c?
^
en*
CD
- P :Q
O CD
monstration of levels of control and compliance
idental release prevention program requirements
CQ
•*5 Q
I10*
3- g
3 ^
o
§ i
CD"!
en r*
" §
||
CD CD
3 en
•-0 O
**
d"
CD
monstration of applicability no less stringent?
*
«
ULE SUBSTITUTION OPTION (Section 63.!
«
w
n
o
CB
-------
-------
« £ o
a = i
§ g
f
f-+>
ft
to
NJ
3>
CD
co 3*
3 S
ft
implemen
promulga
§ °-
O. S
3
CD
S
fT
cr
Cfl
0
a
O
•a
«^
S"
1
S"
»
I
•o
I
.8.
to
LA
N)
O
i
to
to
to
»3 yQ
O 1$
) . ,0
CD C*
c/a *-•
£ 3
|f
cro £L
CD en
S- O
I
en
O
§
CD
Q.
CD
en
o"
T3
O
•to
NJ
Reflect applicab
ty criteria no less
3
pe
contain
O.
s,-
5°
en
^^
P
*-»•
Q.
O
CD
I
f
TO
ff
-------
-------
OJ
s.
•5"
S?
rmitting program?
to
r H
g s*
3 c?
fD i. . ,
Emergency Response Co
srgency Planning Commi
i§
en M.
•O en
0°
J3
P
O=
CD
t.
CD
n
3*
1
SL
GO
O.
a
1
en
cr.
S"
W
§
a
°->3
^ CD
o J3
aUr.
i" §
s° s,
s. ^°
ordination mechanisms tl
each of the following en
£T.
" 1
"O
i
CD
»*0
3
ere
CD
3
o
^
E^
••™*
e
CD
Demonst
requirem<
3 3
A A
-.2
,||
CL GO
3' 5?
p ff-
3. p
al
PS a.
CD O
3 CD
s !»
<•* o
§ SL
s —
§.8
»• o
3° a.
ere g
If
°-J ^^
CD
^
cl
I
o"
to
TJ
1
si
ci°
technical assistance to si
f
en
O
1
CD
en
5°
9*
3"
ere
en
3
*—
cr
e
en
3'
S
en
to
CD gj
GO St
S 3
£*> (to
S|
S.
cr
cT
c?
CD
I
w
O
4
a.
3
1
ere
1
1
"2.
3
en
e
o*
3
5°
S
Oo
.
0
to
to
!?
2.
<"
3'
ere
P
o.
»-t
5
CD*
i
>«**
ere
a.
£
3
ere
CD
3
S
r^-
"H.
ST
3
en
•O
to
. i—
'tf
1
5-
g
o
• "-ft
en
ST
^^
^-t*
0
P3
*^
1
1
O
CD
3
o
en
3
f-p.
3'
o
•i>
•o
3
!
C
en
^^^
"1
en
P
O
^h-
CD
o"*
H«l
O*
g.
3"
ere
-------
-------
APPENDIX F
SAMPLE TEXT FOR FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES, COMPLETENESS REVIEW
LETTER, FINAL APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL LETTER, GOVERNOR'S LETTER AND
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S LETTER
-------
-------
SAMPLE FEDERAL REGISTER TsTOTTrp
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT PERIOD
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
(Insert name of State); Request for Approval of Section 112 (1) Authority
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Notice of Receipt of a Complete Application for State X,
Notice of Public Hearing and Public Comment Period.
SUMMARY: State X has applied for approval of its air toxics rule/program ("if rule, specify
ralel under section 112(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended November 15, 1990. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed State X's submittal and has made the
decision that State X's air toxics rule/program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to
qualify as a complete submittal. Thus, the EPA intends to take comment on whether the State's
rule/program should be implemented and enforced in place of the Federal section 112
rule/program. State X's submittal is available for public review and comment.
DATES: All comments on State X's submittal must be received by the close of business on
(insert date at least 30 calendar days after date of publication in Federal Register).
ADDRESSES: Copies of State X's submittal are available during (insert business hours) at the
following addresses for inspection and copying: (insert appropriate State address); U.S EPA
Headquarters Library, PM 211 A, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, Phone:
202/382-5926; and U.S. EPA Region (insert Region Number's Regional Library, (insert the
address, phone number, and contact). Written comments should be sent to (insert name,
address, and phone number of Regional contact), and should be submitted concurrently to (insert
name, address, and phone number of State agency contact).
(Insert name, address, and phone number of
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
the appropriate Regional Contact.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Section 112 (1) of the 1990 Clean Air Act enables the EPA to approve State air toxics
programs or rules to operate in place of the Federal air toxic program. Approval is granted by
F-l
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
the EPA if the Agency finds that the State program or rule: (1) is "no less stringent" than the-
corresponding Federal rule or program, (2) adequate authority and resources exist, (3) schedule
for implementation and compliance is sufficiently expeditious, and (4) the program is otherwise
in compliance with Federal guidance.
B. State X
(Insert paragraph briefly describing the State's approval history prior to submission of the
"official" application.)
(May wish to insert a paragraph here that directs the public's attention to certain issues.)
EPA will consider all public comments submitted regarding the State X submittal during the
public comment period. Issues raised by those comments will be carefully reviewed and
considered in the decision to approve or disapprove the submittal. The EPA expects to make
a final decision on whether or not to approve State X's rule/program on (insert date 180 calendar
days after receipt of complete State submittal) and will give notice of the decision in the Federal
Register. The notice will include a summary of the reasons for the final determination and a
response to all major comments.
LIST OF SUBJECT IN 40 CFR PART 63: (List subjects)
AUTHORITY: This notice is issued under the authority of Title m of Clean Air Act as
amended 42 U.S.C. 2399.
Dated:
Regional Administrator
F-2
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
SAMPLE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE ANNOUNCING APPROVAL/DELEGATION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR PART 63
(Insert State); Approval of Section 112(1) Authority; rule/program (if rule, specify rule')
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency
ACTION: Notice of Final Determination on State X's Application for Approval of Section 112(1)
authority
SUMMARY: State X has applied for final approval of its air toxics rule/program (if rule.
specify rule) under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended November 15, 1990.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed State X's application and has reached
a decision that State X's air toxics rule/program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to
qualify for approval. Thus, except for any exclusions noted under items A.3 and A.4, the EPA
is granting approval to State X to implement and enforce its rule/program.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Final approval for State X shall be effective (specify date of publication
in Federal Register.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Section 112 (1) of the 1990 Clean Air Act enables the EPA to approve State air toxics
rules or programs in place of Federal air toxics rules or requirements. Approval is granted by
the EPA if the Agency finds that the State rule or program: (1) is "no less stringent" than the
corresponding Federal program or rule, (2) adequate authority and resources exist, (3) the
schedule for implementation and compliance is sufficiently expeditious, and (4) the rule/program
is otherwise in compliance with Federal guidance.
On (insert date), State X submitted an official application to obtain approval to implement
and enforce the air toxic rule/program (if rule. speciiV mleV On (insert date), the EPA made
the decision that State X's air toxics rule/program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to
qualify as a complete submittal. Along with the completeness determination, the EPA
announced the availability of the submittal for public comment in the Federal Register on (insert
date).
F-3
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
1. (Insert discussion on public comments received and the response to those comments.
Additionally, in the case where a State had to make changes to .its submittal in order to be
approved, insert discussion of the needed changes for approval and what the State agreed to do
to be approved.)
2. (Insert discussion of any different or additional procedural steps during the approval process.
For example, the State may have held a public hearing on a portion of its program which was
substantially modified subsequent to the initial State public hearing.)
3. (Insert discussion which describes any major portions of the State's program which are not
part of the approved State air toxics program; e.g., any major State requirements that are
broader in scope than Federal requirements.)
4. (Insert a discussion of any portions of the air toxics program that will continue to be
regulated by the EPA as a result of partial program approval or unregulated segments of the
hazardous air pollutant universe.)
B.
Decision
After reviewing the public comments and the resulting changes the State has made to its
submittal and rules/program since the public comment period, it is concluded that State X's
submittal for approval meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by
section 112 of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, State X is granted approval to implement and
enforce its air toxics rule/program (if rule, specify rule'). State X now has primary
implementation and enforcement responsibility, although under section 112 (1)(7), the EPA
retains the right to enforce any applicable emission standard or requirement.
(May want to include the approval/delegation letter to State X)
Effective immediately, all applications, reports, and other correspondence required under the
rule/program should be sent to State X (insert address) rather than to the EPA Region Y in
(insert City).
LIST OF SUBJECT IN 40 CFR PART 63:
(List subjects)
AUTHORITY: This notice is issued under the authority of section 112 of the Clean Air Act as
amended 42 U.S.C. 2399.
Dated:
Regional Administrator
F-4
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
SAMPLE COMPLETENESS DETERMINATION LETTER
If application was determined to be complete:
Dear :
Our office has completed a preliminary review of your submittal for delegation of
authority to implement and enforce the rule/program fif rule, specify rule') in place of the
otherwise applicable Federal section 112 standard or requirement. Your application was found
to be complete and will now enter the public comment period. The Federal Register notice
announcing the beginning of the public comment period will be published on date The
comment period will last 30 days, after which the EPA will begin final review of your
application. You may submit State responses up to date 30 davs after close of public comment
period • The final review period will begin on date and you should receive final notification
of approval/disapproval on or about date .
Sincerely,
Regional Administrator
If application was found to be incomplete:
Dear ,:
Our office has completed a preliminary review of your submittal for delegation of
authority to implement and enforce the rule/program (if rule, specify rule^) in place of the
otherwise applicable Federal section 112 standard or requirement. Your application was found
to be incomplete for the following reason(s):
You may elect to resubmit your application upon correction of the deficiencies listed above, and
the delegation procedure will be restarted.
Sincerely,
Regional Administrator
F-5
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
SAMPLE APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL LETTER
If delegation was approved:
Dear :
This is in response to your letter of date, requesting authority to implement and enforce
the air toxics rule/program (if rule, specify rule^ as specified in section 112 of the Clean Air
Act. We have reviewed the pertinent laws of State X and the rules and regulations thereof, and
have determined that they provide an adequate and effective procedure for implementation and
enforcement of the rule/program fif rule, specify rule") submitted bv State X OR the Federal rule
as written rspecifv rule') . Therefore, pursuant to the Clean Air Act as amended and 40 CFR
(insert specific parts'), we delegate our primary authority for implementation and enforcement
of section 112, respectively, to the State of as follows:
A. Responsibility for all sources located or to be located in State X subject to emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) promulgated in 40 CFR part and amendments
thereto as published in the Federal Register as of the date of your request letter, (list the source
categories covered by this authority).
B. This delegation is based upon the following conditions:
L Enforcement of emission standards in State X will be the primary responsibility
of the (insert State Agency). If the State determines that such enforcement is not feasible and
so notifies the EPA, or where the State acts in a manner inconsistent with the terms of this
granted authority, the EPA will exercise its concurrent enforcement authority pursuant to section
112(1)(7) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, with respect to sources within State X subject to
section 112 requirements.
2. (May insert any reporting requirements)
3. If the Administrator determines that the State procedure for enforcing or
implementing the Title m requirements is inadequate, or is not being effectively carried out, his
delegation may be revoked in whole or in part. Any such revocation shall be effective as of the
date specified in a Notice of Revocation to State X.
4. (Insert requirement for public and EPA availability to information collected by
the State in accordance with these regulations).
F-6
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
Since this action is effective immediately, there is no requirement that State X notify the EPA
of its acceptance. Unless the EPA receives from State X written notice of objections within ten
(10) days of the date of receipt of-this letter, the State will t>e deemed to have accepted all of
the terms as stated herein.
Sincerely,
Regional Administrator
If final review resulted in disapproval of application:
Dear :
Our office has completed the review of your application for delegation of authority to
implement and enforce rule/program (if rule, specify rule") OR the federal rule as written
(specify rule) in place of the otherwise applicable Federal section 112 rule or requirement. Your
application was disapproved for the following reason(s): (insert reasons)
Sincerely,
Regional Administrator
F-7
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
SAMPLE GOVERNOR'S LETTER
Office of the Governor
State
etc.
Regional Administrator
Region , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Address
City, State, Zip
Dear Administrator,
In accordance with Title I, section 112(1) of the Clean Air Act as amended on November
15, 1990,1 am forwarding an application for delegation of authority to implement and enforce,
in place of the otherwise applicable Federal section 112 rule or requirement, emissions standards
for the State Air Toxics program/rule Cif rule, specify rule') described herein. I believe that you
will find that this program/rule is an adequate substitute for the Federal program/rule (if rule.
specify rule'), and meets all the necessary Federal requirements set forth hi section 112 of the
Act.
Should you require further information, please contact Agency Director or Agency
Contact of State Agency. Include contact information. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Governor
F-8
-------
-------
Appendix F (Continued)
SAMPLE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S LETTER
Office of the Attorney General-
State
etc.
Regional Administrator
Region , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Address
City, State, Zip
Dear Administrator,
I hereby certify pursuant to my authority as Attorney General of the State of State and
in accordance with Title I section 112(1) of the Clean Air Act as amended on November 15,
1990, that in my opinion the laws of State: (1) provide adequate authority to implement the
program/rule (if rule, specify rule") described in the application submitted by State Agency. (2)
adequately enforce compliance with such program/rule, and (3) regulate at a minimum the same
sources as the Federal Clean Air Act, and do so with standards that are no less stringent than
those specified by the Federal Clean Air Act. I hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
that the application submitted by State Agency is legally accurate. The specific authorities
provided are contained in statutes or regulations lawfully adopted at the time this Statement is
signed and which will be effective by the time this program is approved, or are provided by
judicial decisions issued at the time this Statement is signed.
Sincerely,
Attorney General
Seal of Office
F-9
-------
-------
APPENDIX G
[TO BE ADDED IN NEXT VERSION]
-------
-------
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10,
11,
12,
13,
14.
15.
Appendix H
REFERENCES
Toxic Air Pollutants: State and Local Regulatory-
Strategies - 1989 - Stappa/Alapco.
U.S. EPA, 19XX. State Implementation Plan Completeness
Criteria. Proposed Rule XX Federal Register XXXXX, Date.
Partial, Limited and Conditional Approval of SIP Submittals
Memo - AQMD.
U.S. EPA, 1993. Title V Operating Permits Memo - John Seitz
April 13, 1993.
U.S. EPA, 19XX. Model Title V Operating Permits - Mike
Trutna.
UcS. EPA, 1993. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories; General Provisions;
Proposed Rule 58 Federal Register 42760. August 11, 1993.
U.S. EPA, 1993. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Perchloroethvlene Dry
Cleaning Facilities XX Federal Register XXXXXX.
September 22, 1993.
U.S. EPA, 1992. Operating Permit Program, Final Rule 57
Federal Register 32250. July, 21, 1992.
U.S. EPA, 1983. Good Practice Manual For Delegation of NSPS
and NESHAPS. February 1983.
U.S. EPA, 1993. Approval of State Programs and Delegation
of Federal Authorities - Proposed Rule 58 Federal Register
29296. May, 19, 1993.
U.S. EPA, 1993. Delegations Issues Concerning Section 112
and Title V memo - John Seitz Date.
U.S. EPA, 1992. State Program Approval Handbook
92-004. May 1992.
EPA 500-B-
U.S. EPA, 1992. Suggested Procedures For Review Of State
UST Applications EPA 500-B-92-005. May 1992
TRC Environmental Corp., 1992. Administrative Procedures
for Section 112(1) Delegation of State Air Toxic Programs -
Draft Report EPA Contract No. 68-DOO121. October 1992.
TRC Environmental Corp., 1993. Section 112(1) Delegation
Case Studies using Texas Air Toxics Programs •- Draft Report.
EPA Contract No. 68-DO-0121. April 30, 1993.
-------
-------
Please Note:
Many of the memorandums and Federal Register
notices referred to in this reference section may
be obtained by accessing the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN) bulletin board system in the CAAA
section. The Federal Register notices published
since 1990 will appear under Recently Signed
Rules. The policy memos and guidance would be
under "Title III Policy and Guidance". To access
the TTN call (919) 541-5742 for a 1200, 2400, or
9600 bps modem. If problems are encountered
accessing the bulletin board, call (919) 541-5384.
-------
------- |