Note: This message is displayed if (1) your browser is not standards-compliant or (2) you have you disabled CSS. Read our Policies for more information.
New major stationary sources and modifications to major stationary sources are required to undergo major new source review (NSR) prior to constructing. There are two major NSR programs, one for areas that are in attainment with the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and one for areas that are designated as nonattainment.
The attainment NSR program is referred to as Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and is contained in 326 IAC 2-2. Part C of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA) requires states to include, in their state implementation plan (SIP), emission limitations and other measures that are necessary to prevent significant deterioration of the air quality in each region designated as attainment or unclassifiable. The federal regulations, 40 CFR 51.166, contain the specific minimum requirements for a PSD program. If a state does not have a PSD program as an approved part of its SIP, a state may be delegated the authority to implement and enforce the federal PSD program contained in 40 CFR 52.21. On September 30, 1980Indiana was delegated the authority to implement the PSD program. Indiana received final approval to implement 326 IAC 2-2 on March 3, 2003.
The nonattainment NSR program is referred to as Emission Offset and is contained in 326 IAC 2-3. Part D of Title I of the CAA requires states to include, in the SIP, enforceable emission limitations and related control measures to assure reasonable progress toward the national air quality standard. The federal regulations, 40 CFR 51.165, contain the specific minimum requirements for a nonattainment NSR program. If a state does not have a nonattainment NSR program as an approved part of its SIP, U.S. EPA requires states to follow the Offset Interpretative rule codified in 40 CFR 51, Appendix S. Indiana received final approval to implement 326 IAC 2-3 on October 27, 1994.
The major NSR programs include the most complex environmental permitting requirements. For 30 years U.S. EPA, state regulatory agencies and courts have issued policies and decisions to interpret the program. After an extensive stakeholder process, U.S. EPA proposed to overhaul the NSR program on July 23, 1996. U.S. EPA solicited further comment on two provisions on July 24, 1998.
On December 31, 2002, U.S. EPA took final action on four changes to the NSR program that stemmed from the July 1996 proposal:
U.S. EPA stated that these revisions "are intended to provide greater regulatory certainty, administrative flexibility, and permit streamlining, while ensuring the current level of environmental protection and benefit derived from the program and, in certain respects, resulting in greater environmental protection" (67 FR 80186, December 31, 2002).
The December 31, 2002 federal rule required states with approved SIPs to adopt the federal NSR reform amendments or equivalent provisions no later than January 2, 2006. Indiana held it's first public information session for stakeholders in March 2003, and began the rulemaking process shortly thereafter. It was not possible to adopt the federal rules by reference or verbatim, because the federal program relies heavily on state minor source permitting. Therefore, Indiana chose to integrate the federal program into existing Indiana permitting rules. After several public meetings and comment periods the Air Pollution Control Board final adopted the NSR reform changes at the June 2, 2004 hearing. The state NSR Reform rulemaking became effective on September 9, 2004.
The difference in applicability of the two major NSR programs is based on the attainment status for the area in which construction is being proposed. The attainment status is pollutant specific, so some units may be reviewed under PSD while others are reviewed under emission offset. The federal government designates nonattainment areas for Indiana in 40 CFR 81.315. The applicability of the emission offset program (326 IAC 2-3) depends on the attainment status in the state rules under 326 IAC 1-4. Due to lengthy state rulemaking process, there is generally a 6-18 month period between the federal designation and the incorporation into state rules. Occasionally U.S. EPA allows nonattainment NSR to be deferred for an amount of time in order for states to update their rules. At other times U.S. EPA requires nonattainment NSR immediately upon the 40 CFR 81.315 designation effective date. In those situations the nonattainment is based on the U.S. EPA interpretive ruling found in 40 CFR 51, Appendix S.
For purposes of this NSR Reform training, we are discussing the state PSD and emission offset program found in 2-2 and 2-3, not the federal programs found in 40 CFR 51.165, 40 CFR 51.166, 40 CFR 51 Appendix S, 40 CFR 52.21or 40 CFR 52.24.
As of October 1, 2004 this was the current nonattainment status for Indiana:
|SO2||1-hr Ozone||8-hr Ozone||PM2.5*|
|Lake||Primary (portions only)||Severe||Moderate||Proposed nonattainment|
|St. Joseph||Basic||Proposed nonattainment|
* Proposed nonattainment designation by U.S. EPA on 6-29-04
The remaining Indiana counties and criteria pollutants are designated as attainment or unclassifiable, at this time.
The actual-to-projected-actual applicability test is a comparison of the projected actual emissions from all affected emission units with the baseline actual emissions from the affected emission units. The actual-to-projected-actual applicability test is used to determine if a physical or operational change at an existing emissions unit will result in a significant emissions increase. The actual-to-projected-actual applicability test is only used for changes made at existing emission units. The key components of the actual-to-projected-actual applicability test are determining the pre-change emissions (baseline actual emissions) and the post change emissions (projected actual emissions). These determinations and the required recordkeeping and reporting can be slightly different if you are a non-electric utility steam generating unit (Non-EUSGU) or if you are an electric utility steam generating unit (EUSGU).
NSR Reform adds a new definition to the major NSR rules, "Baseline actual emissions" (326 IAC 2-2-1(e)). Baseline actual emissions are used to determine the pre-change emissions. Baseline actual emissions are the starting point to determine whether a change will be subject to major NSR.
Baseline actual emissions for Non-EUSGUs is the average annual emissions rate based on the unit's operation during any consecutive 24-month period in the past ten (10) years. The ten (10) year period cannot include any period earlier than November 15, 1990. (326 IAC 2-2-1(e)(2))
Baseline actual emissions for EUSGUs is the average annual emissions rate based on the unit's operation during any consecutive 24-month period in the past five (5) years (326 IAC 2-2-1(e)(1)).
Only an EUSGU may use a different time period upon determination that it is more representative of normal source operation.
Emission units installed after the selected 24-month period will have baseline actual emissions of zero, unless the emissions unit is new as defined in 326 IAC 2-2-1(u)(1).
Any emissions during the selected 24-month period that resulted from operation in excess of any applicable emission limit must not be included in the baseline actual emissions determination.
Baseline actual emissions are used for modifications, netting and determining plant-wide applicability limitations.
Baseline actual emissions are adjusted for the following:
If a project shows that a significant emissions increase will result, the owner or operator has the option of taking into consideration any contemporaneous emissions changes that may allow a "net out" of major NSR applicability. A "net out" is a showing that the net emissions increase at the major stationary source will not be significant.
NSR reform does not change the contemporaneous period. The contemporaneous period still includes all creditable increases and decreases in actual emissions that have occurred between the date five (5) years before construction of the particular change commences and the date the increase from the change occurs.
Existing emissions units may calculate baseline actual emissions for each contemporaneous event using the ten (10) year look back period.
Projected actual emissions are the maximum level of emissions associated with the level and type of business activity projected to occur in any one (1) of the next five (5) or ten (10) years following a specific project. Projected actual emissions involve future business activity and require documentation available from public documents or confidential business information.
Projected actual emissions are defined in the rules at 326 IAC 2-2-1(rr). The projection period begins on the date that the affected emissions unit resumes regular operation after completion of the proposed project and includes the 12 months after this date.
A unit's projected actual emissions rate is calculated as the product of the hourly emissions rate based on the unit's post-change operational capabilities taking into account the legally enforceable restrictions that could affect the hourly rate and the projected level of utilization based on the unit's historical annual utilization rate and available information about the unit's most likely post-change capacity utilization. Projections are for any one (1) of five (5) years or one (1) of ten (10) years if the change involves an increase in the emissions unit's PTE or capacity.
The owner or operator may choose to use the emissions unit's potential to emit, in tons per year, as the projected actual emissions.
Fugitive emissions, if they can be quantified, must be included in the projected actual emissions. Additionally, emissions associated with startups, shutdowns and malfunctions must be included in the projected actual emissions.
Emission increases that are not related to the specific proposed project may be excluded from the projected actual emissions. These are emissions that could have been accommodated during the selected 24-month baseline period by the pre-change emission units. Determining whether certain emissions are related to the proposed project will be a case-by-case determination.
Each of the projected actual emissions must be compared to the baseline actual emissions to determine the magnitude of the resulting emissions increase. Major NSR applicability will be based on the highest emissions increase calculated in this way.
Since all major NSR sources are also Part 70 sources, source modifications will be done pursuant to Part 70 source and permit modification requirements.
Whether the proposed project involves new emissions units, modifications to existing emissions units or a combination of both, there are several different applicability tests that the owner or operator can use to determine if the project will trigger major NSR applicability:
This applicability test is generally used for projects involving new emissions units, however it can be used for changes to existing emissions units. This test involves comparing the post change emissions of the unit (in this case the potential to emit) with the baseline actual emissions. If the emissions unit is an existing emissions unit and potential to emit is used to determine the post change emissions, then the owner or operator is not required to maintain a record of annual emissions for a period of five (5) or ten (10) years following resumption of regular operations nor is the owner or operator required to report post change emissions. If the difference between the post change emissions (potential to emit) and baseline actual emissions is greater than the appropriate major NSR applicability limit, then the project will be subject to major NSR unless the net emissions increase is below the appropriate major NSR applicability limit.
This applicability test is only used for projects involving changes at existing emissions units. The actual to projected actual applicability test involves comparing the post change emissions (in this case the projected actual emissions) with the baseline actual emissions. If the difference between the post change emissions (projected actual emissions) and baseline actual emissions is greater than the appropriate major NSR applicability limit, the project will be subject to major NSR unless the net emissions increase is below the appropriate major NSR applicability limit. (As mentioned above, the owner or operator may choose to use the actual to potential applicability test for existing units instead.)
For projects involving combinations of new emissions units, existing emissions units and clean units, the Hybrid Applicability Test is used. The Hybrid Applicability Test involves using the appropriate applicability test as described above for each type of emissions unit and then adding the emissions increases together. If the sum of the emissions increases is greater than the appropriate major NSR applicability limit, then the project will be subject to major NSR unless the net emissions increase is below the appropriate major NSR applicability limit.
Other than projects at a clean unit or at a source with a PAL, when there is a reasonable possibility that a project that is not part of a major modification may result in a significant emissions increase and projected actual emissions are not calculated using the emissions unit's potential to emit, before beginning actual construction the owner or operator shall document and maintain the following information:
The owner or operator is required to monitor emissions of any regulated pollutant that could increase as a result of the project and that is emitted by any emissions unit included in the project.
The owner or operator is required to maintain a record of the annual emissions, in tons per year on a calendar year basis, for a period of five (5) years following resumption of regular operations or for a period of ten (10) years following resumption of regular operations if the project increases the design capacity or the potential to emit of the emissions unit.
If the unit is an existing EUSGU, the owner or operator is required to submit a report within sixty (60) days after the end of the year to the department during the period of time that the post change emissions are calculated and maintained.
If the existing unit is a non-EUSGU the owner or operator is required to report within sixty (60) days after the end of the year to the department the annual emissions, in tons per year, exceeding the baseline actual emissions by a significant amount and if the emissions differ from the preconstruction projection.
The Clean Unit (CU) designations are available to emissions units at major sources that have installed 'state-of-the-art' air pollution control (including pollution prevention) systems. The physical or operational changes at these Clean Units are reviewed under a special 'Clean Unit test' instead of the other net emissions increase methodologies in the rule (i.e., ATPA) discussed in the previous section. The review under the CU test for various changes that continue to maintain the CU designation is intended to provide sources with enhanced flexibility to make changes in response to market demand without a need to obtain a pre-construction major NSR permit.
The premise for providing the CU designation and test is that there are minimal or no improvements in emission control technologies under major NSR due to physical or operational changes at the emissions units that have installed state-of-the-art air pollution control technology in the recent past (previous 10 years). The new applicability test provides criteria to determine whether physical or operational changes at the emissions units affect the CU designation and prompt the need for evaluating applicability under the ATPA test.
Any emission unit at a major source that is equipped with state-of-the-art air pollution control (including pollution prevention) is eligible for the CU designation. The air pollution control must also achieve reductions when compared to the level of emissions from the uncontrolled, standard new emissions unit. The Permittee is also required to make a financial investment for the installation of the emissions control technology. The investments by the Permittee may be expenses towards research and development or application of pollution prevention techniques at the emissions units.
The CU designation is pollutant specific and therefore, the Permittee will have to obtain a separate CU designation for each pollutant. If the same control technology is used to control multiple pollutants, the Permittee can use the same control technology as a basis for multiple CU designations. (See next section about the types of CU designations). A CU designation cannot be granted for an emissions unit if no reduction is achieved in emissions below the level of standard, uncontrolled, new emissions unit of the same type.
There are two types of CU designations. They are as follows:
The CU test provides the emittees with operational flexibility to make changes in response to market demand fluctuations or other factors requiring minor process changes. These changes can be implemented without a need to obtain a pre-construction approval which is needed to evaluate whether the change triggers major modification requirements under PSD or NA NSR. A key element for this flexibility is that the changes should not affect the Clean Unit designation as discussed in the "maintaining CU designation" section. However, there may be other requirements applicable to these changes under the State's permitting program that may trigger a need for an approval.
The CU test provides certainty and simplicity to the process of evaluating changes at major sources. In evaluating the changes the Permittee need only establish that post change the emission unit will continue to function within the applicable emission limits and/or work practice requirement and will not affect the physical or operation characteristics that formed the basis for the BACT or LAER determination as applicable. That is, the emissions unit will continue to comply with all applicable requirements in the permit, emissions limitations or work practice standards and physical and operational characteristics that formed the basis for the CU designation.
No additional quantification of emissions or demonstration of non-applicability of major NSR requirements is necessary under the CU test.
The CU test can only be used for the changes at units that are designated as such. Under recent revisions to the PSD and NA NSR, the new term 'project' has been added as described in ATPA section. If a project at a major source requires changes at Clean Units and other emissions units, which are not designated as CU, then the CU test can only be applied to the portion of changes at the Clean Unit.
The process of obtaining a CU designation depends upon whether or not the emissions unit is undergoing permit approval under major NSR or modification provisions of PSD or NA NSR. In addition, for select units the CU designation may also be available in a retroactive manner. The different scenarios are discussed below:
There are multiple scenarios that determine the effective date for the CU designation. They are as follows:
The CU designation generally expires 10 years after the date the designation became effective for the emissions unit. The only exception will be the CU designation for existing emissions units that have undergone major NSR permitting and have been automatically designated as CU. In this case the designation expires 10 years after the date the emissions control technology was placed into service.
In addition, the CU designation expires anytime the Permittee fails to maintain the CU designation per the requirements discussed in the section 'maintaining CU designation'.
The following section covers the permitting requirements for establishing CU designations and incorporates the designations in the Part 70 Permit.
The emissions units that automatically qualify for a CU designation do not require any new determination for the designation. Permittees that have existing emissions units that automatically qualify as CUs can use the CU test for changes at these CUs, as long as the designation is valid for the CU. After the date these revisions to the rules become effective in the State, whenever the department issues any major NSR or modification permit for emissions unit that meet the CU criteria, it will be designated as such in the permit.
For the emissions units equipped with emissions control technology that were not, or will not, be reviewed under a major NSR permit, the Permittee must submit an application for Significant Source Modification (SSM) under 326 IAC 2-7-10.5 in order to obtain a CU designation. For new emissions units, after the revisions to the rule become effective in the State, the Permittee shall note in the Significant Source Modification application that the unit should be designated as a CU. In addition to the requirements of the SSM, the application should contain detailed top-down BACT or LAER determinations, as applicable, a demonstration comparing the emissions control technology to the BACT or LAER requirements, as applicable, and modeling analysis to determine impacts on air quality.
For CUs that have not already been incorporated in the Part 70 Permit for the Source, the Permittee either through permit modification or at the time of renewal, should request for the CU designation requirements to be incorporated in the Part 70 Permit.
For emissions units that qualify for CU designation through major NSR the major NSR permit will contain the following:
For emissions units that qualify for CU designation through SSM (no major NSR), the permit will contain the following:
The Part 70 Permit itself should include the following (either through permit modification or incorporated at the time of renewal) as the minimum information pertaining to CU designation:
In order to maintain a CU designation, the emission unit should be in compliance with all emission limitations and/or work practice standards documented in the permit. In addition, the CU should not be altered by any physical or operational change that makes the emissions unit operate differently than the physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for the evaluation of CU designation.
The CU should be in compliance with all applicable requirements in the Part 70 Permit. The emissions control technology evaluated for designating the CU shall be in operation during the life of the CU designation. In the event that the emissions unit or control technology is replaced, the CU designation ends the date the emissions unit or control technology is removed from service.
The increases or decreases of emissions due to physical or operational changes at a CU are not included in the net emissions increase calculations for other changes at the source except:
The emissions credits generated in accordance with the above would have to be surplus, quantifiable, permanent and made enforceable in a permit.
When an area is re-designated for attainment status, the CU designation in effect at the time is not affected. However, for renewal of a CU designation located in such an area, the evaluation is conducted in accordance with requirements applicable at the time.
The term "pollution control project (PCP)" is defined in the major new source review rules (326 IAC 2-2-1 and 326 IAC 2-3-1).
A pollution control project (PCP) is any activity, project, or set of work practices, including pollution prevention, that reduces air emissions. The PCP exclusion is available to owners and operators of major sources that propose to implement PCPs that will result in significant emissions reductions in one or more pollutants but that may also simultaneously result in significant increases in emissions of other regulated pollutants.
Advantage of PCP:
The pollution control project (PCP) exclusion allows the installation of qualified projects to be exempt from becoming major modifications due to the significant emissions increases, or collateral emissions increases related to the project. The PCP exclusion is the mechanism for making requirements of major new source review not applicable to projects that are deemed environmentally beneficial. This exclusion removes major new source review as a regulatory hurdle or disincentive for owners or operators seeking to develop and implement pollution prevention and pollution control strategies.
However, the impacts of the collateral emissions increases still have to be identified, minimized, and mitigated, where appropriate. Collateral emissions increases are the emissions increases of a pollutant other than the ones being targeted to be controlled. The owner or operator that implements a project subject to this exclusion will have to minimize the collateral emissions within the physical configuration and operational standards usually associated with that type of control device or practice.
The PCP exclusion is only applicable to projects that will cause a significant net emissions increase in a regulated pollutant. If there are no emissions increases associated with the project, there is no need to evaluate it in terms of this exclusion because it is exempt from major new source review as it does not cause a significant increase in emissions.
The term "pollution control project (PCP)" is defined in the major new source review rules (326 IAC 2-2-1 and 326 IAC 2-3-1), and includes pollution prevention. The term is limited to the reduction of air emissions for the purposes of the exclusion. It does not cover any other form of mitigation of emissions from other environmental media. Any activity associated with the project necessary to finalize and implement the project is considered part of the PCP. A PCP may also include the replacement or upgrade of an existing emission control device with a more effective control device or technology.
Examples of qualified projects:
Addition of a thermal oxidizer to control an existing paint booth. Any associated activities necessary for the construction and operation of the thermal oxidizer, such as pipes, valves, meters, etc.
Change in process, product reformulation or redesign, substitution of less polluting raw materials.
Modification of an existing fuel injection system of an internal combustion engine to optimize in-cylinder mixing of air and natural gas fuel, thus reducing the formation of NOx.
Change in raw materials due to cost or shortage and, at the same time, the change reduces emissions.
There are two (2) general types of PCPs that are evaluated for the exclusion:
The first general type of pollution control project (PCP) consists of those projects that are specifically "listed" in the definitions of "pollution control project" in the major new source review rules (326 IAC 2-2-1 and 326 IAC 2-3-1) and are presumed to be environmentally beneficial.
"Listed" PCPs are projects that have been automatically presumed to satisfy the environmentally beneficial test of the PCP exclusion because they have been historically proven to reduce emissions from a non-source specific perspective. These listed projects are:
|A heavier grade of fuel oil||A lighter grade of fuel oil|
|Any grade of oil||0.05% sulfur diesel|
|High sulfur coal||Low sulfur coal with a 1.2% maximum sulfur content|
|Coal||Wood, excluding "dirty" wood *|
|Coal||No. 2 fuel oil with a 0.5% maximum sulfur content|
|Coal||Natural gas, propane, or gasified coal|
|Oil||Natural gas, propane, or gasified coal|
|Any solid fuel||Natural gas, propane, or gasified coal|
* "Dirty" wood includes construction or demolition waste, chemical or pesticide treated wood, and other forms of unclean wood. Fuel switching to this type of wood does not automatically qualify for a PCP.
For the list of ozone depleting substances, please see Appendix A: Ozone Depletion Substance.
The second general type of PCP consists of those projects that are not specifically listed in the definitions of "pollution control project" in the major new source review rules (326 IAC 2-2-1 and 326 IAC 2-3-1). These projects must be demonstrated to be environmentally beneficial on a case-by-case basis.
The types of projects that do not qualify as PCPs are:
An owner or operator must satisfy two (2) criteria to qualify for the pollution control project (PCP) exclusion:
To satisfy the first criterion, the "environmentally beneficial" test, the owner or operator must demonstrate that the emission decreases due to the project outweigh the impacts of any associated emissions increases. The scope of this environmentally beneficial analysis depends on the project.
To satisfy the second criterion, the "cause or contribute" test, the owner or operator must demonstrate that the collateral emissions increases associated with the project will not cause or contribute to a violation of NAAQS or PSD increment. These increases should also not adversely impact an air quality related value, such as visibility, in a Class I area. This can be determined by performing an air quality analysis or by other methods that sufficiently demonstrate that the project will not cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS or PSD increment or adversely impact an air quality related value. Other methods that may be acceptable are using a recent, previously completed air quality analysis or using a quick, screening-level analysis if the area is an attainment area for the pollutant of concern and the PSD increment is not close to being consumed.
In an area that is designated nonattainment for the collateral pollutant, an owner or operator must satisfy the air quality analysis requirement by demonstrating that the collateral emissions are being offset so that no actual increase is realized. This is sufficient to demonstrate that the project does not cause or contribute to the violation or adversely impact an air quality related value.
There are currently no Class I areas in Indiana. The closest Class I area to Indiana is Mammoth Cave in Kentucky.
For the presumed environmentally beneficial projects indicated in the rule (also known as "listed" projects), a simple statement indicating that it is one of the listed projects is sufficient to satisfy the environmentally beneficial test.
For projects that are not specifically listed in the rule which are to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, a more rigorous environmentally beneficial analysis will be required. Source specific factors will be considered in the analysis, and the owner or operator must demonstrate that the benefits of the reductions outweigh the impacts of the increases.
The same general criteria are used in evaluating a PCP exclusion request in a nonattainment area; however, there are a few additional requirements. If the PCP would result in a significant net emissions increase in any regulated NSR pollutant for which the area is classified as nonattainment, the owner or operator must offset the significant net emissions increase from the PCP on a 1:1 ratio in accordance with the following provisions:
The application requirements for PCP exclusions for listed and non-listed projects include essentially the same basic information, although less environmental beneficial analysis will be necessary for listed projects. Descriptions of the application requirements for listed and non-listed projects are provided below. In either case, the owner or operator should include the Application Cover Sheet and the GSD-01 form (General Source Data), in the application.
The approval process for listed projects is streamlined so that upon submission of a notification to the department, the owner or operator may start the construction of the project. The notification also serves as the minor permit modification application in accordance with 326 IAC 2-7-12(b)(1)(G). After submittal of the minor permit modification application, the owner or operator can begin operation of the pollution control project pursuant to 326 IAC 2-7-12(b)(7).
To ensure a smoother process, the owner or operator should include all the information necessary for a minor permit modification with the notification to allow simultaneous processing of the permit modification. The operating permit will be modified under the minor permit modification process and must undergo public review. The department must address any comments received during the comment period.
The approval process for non-listed projects involves a source modification as well as a permit modification. The owner or operator must submit a significant source and permit modification application to the department pursuant to 326 IAC 2-7-10.5(f)(8) and 326 IAC 2-7-12(d) and obtain approval prior to construction and operation of the PCP.
To ensure a smoother process, the owner or operator should include all the information necessary for a significant permit modification with the source modification application to allow simultaneous processing of the source modification and permit modification under 326 IAC 2-7-12(c)(2). The significant source and permit modifications must undergo public review. The department must address comments received during the comment period.
In addition to these forms:
the notification or application must include the following information:
After approval under the pollution control project (PCP) exclusion provisions, the owner or operator must:
The PCP exclusion only exempts the significant emission increase of the project from major new source requirements. The PCP exclusion does not exempt the control from other applicable compliance monitoring and reporting requirements that may be required to ensure that the PCP is environmentally beneficial and will not cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS or PSD increment or adversely impact an air quality related value. Owners or operators will need to report collateral emissions from PCPs on their emission statements.
The emission reductions initially achieved by a pollution control project (PCP) are an integral part of the environmentally beneficial analysis. To use the emission reductions for emission credit would not ensure appropriate environmental protection. Therefore, emission reductions used for the purposes of qualifying as a PCP can not be used as offsets, for netting, or for generation of emission reduction credits. If an owner or operator further reduces emissions after qualifying for the PCP exclusion, it may be possible to use those reductions for offsets or netting. In this situation, the emission credit is the difference between the level of reduction that was used to qualify for the PCP exclusion and the new emissions reductions. The reductions should be surplus, quantifiable, and permanent.
A plant-wide applicability limit (PAL) is an optional approach that will provide owners or operators of major NSR stationary sources with the ability to manage source-wide emissions without triggering major NSR applicability. The basis for a PAL is baseline actual emissions. A PAL is an annual (source-wide) emission limitation (12-month total rolled monthly) under which the source can make any changes without triggering major NSR applicability for that pollutant. A PAL is pollutant specific and a PAL is approved for a ten (10) year term.
A source with a PAL permit may modify the emissions unit or add new emissions units, without triggering major NSR applicability, as long as the PAL limit is not exceeded.
The PAL emissions limit is based on the sources baseline actual emissions for the PAL pollutant. Baseline actual emissions are calculated on a unit specific basis using the same 24-month period for each emissions unit. The PAL emissions limit is determined as follows;
The owner or operator must then submit a permit application for a PAL.
As part of a permit application requesting a PAL the owner or operator of a major stationary source must submit the following information:
As part of a PAL application the owner or operator must use current emissions or other current direct measurement data to demonstrate that the monitoring system accurately determines emissions from each unit subject to the PAL. Data will need to be collected from all units subject to the PAL, including those that may be unregulated at the present time. If the owner or operator does not have current emissions data, or if the emissions unit's operation has changed since collection of that data, current accurate data will need to be obtained. This can be done by conducting performance tests or other direct measurements before submission of a complete permit application to obtain a PAL.
A PAL permit must contain enforceable requirements for a monitoring system that accurately determines plant-wide emissions for the PAL pollutant in terms of mass per unit time. All units operating under a PAL must have sufficient monitoring to accurately determine plant-wide emissions for a 12-month rolling total. The PAL monitoring system must employ one (1) or more of the four (4) general monitoring approaches and must be approved by the department. The generally acceptable monitoring approaches for a PAL permit are the following:
The owner or operator shall retain a copy of all records necessary to determine compliance with the PAL, including a determination of each emissions unit's twelve (12) month rolling total emissions, for five (5) years.
The owner or operator shall retain a copy of the PAL permit application, any applications for revisions to the PAL, each Part 70 annual certification of compliance, and all data relied on in certifying the compliance for a period of fifteen (15) years.
The owner or operator shall submit semiannual monitoring reports within thirty (30) days of each reporting period. The reports shall include reports of any deviations or exceedance of the PAL requirements, the results of any revalidation test or method within three (3) months after completion of the test method.
A PAL is effective for a period of ten (10) years. A timely application must be submitted to the department by the source owner or operator to request renewal of a PAL. A timely application is one that is submitted at least six (6) months prior to, but not earlier than eighteen (18) months from, the date of PAL expiration. If the owner or operator submits a complete application to renew the PAL within this time period, then the PAL shall continue to be effective until the revised permit with the renewed PAL is issued. The PAL may be renewed at the same level or the department may set the PAL at a level it determines to be more representative of the source's baseline actual emissions.
The department may increase a PAL emission limitation during the PAL effective period only if the source complies with the following:
The owner or operator may at any time submit a written request to the department to terminate or revoke a PAL prior to the expiration or renewal of the PAL. The owner or operator may submit a proposed allowable emission limitation for each group of emissions units by distributing the PAL allowable emissions for the source among each of the emissions units that existed under the PAL.
The department shall decide whether and how the PAL allowable emissions will be distributed and issue a revised permit incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of emissions units, as the department determines is appropriate.
The source shall continue to comply with a source-wide, multi-unit emissions cap equivalent to the level of the PAL emission limitation until the department issues a revised permit incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of emissions units.
Class I Substance: one of several groups of chemicals with an ozone-depletion potential of 0.2 or higher
Class II Substance: a chemical with an ozone-depletion potential of less than 0.2