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
!»§  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.

-------

-------