DRAFT
DCB Comments on Latest Draft Changes to OAR 340-224 and OAR 340-225
OAR 340-224
The new language in 0010(2) which defines the sources that are subject to State New Source Review doesn’t seem to cover modifications to existing sources. Specifically, new subsections (2)(b) and (2)(c) only require an increase in a regulated pollutant PSEL and not that there is an increase resulting from a physical change or change in the method of operation.
State NSR applies to all PSEL increases > SER. BACT applies if there is a major modification. PSEL > SER and no major mod, then modeling required (old division 222)
The revision to subsection 0010(3) doesn’t work for attainment and unclassifiable areas where PSD applies to non-criteria pollutants for which areas are not designated. PSD does not apply on a pollutant by pollutant basis but rather it applies to all regulated pollutants with the narrow exception of regulated pollutants for which the area is designated nonattainment.
The changes to the applicability language for sustainment areas (0045) and maintenance areas (0060) won’t work if the areas aren’t also designated as attainment or unclassifiable areas for the sustainment and maintenance pollutants, respectively. However, we understand that these designations are intended to be mutually exclusive so an area would not have two different designations under ODEQ’s rules. Under the Federal Clean Air Act, ODEQ’s designation of a sustainment area or maintenance area can’t change the federal major source program that applies to those areas – the PSD program. The new applicability language that says that Oregon’s PSD program (0070) only applies to the sustainment or maintenance pollutant would limit the PSD program to only that pollutant instead of all regulated NSR pollutants as required. The applicability provisions in these two sections really need to say that the source must meet 0070 and, for the sustainment (maintenance) pollutant, the following additional requirements.
The change to the language in 0210(3) completely changes the meaning of this provision which was to address the situation where a project is modified after the permit for it has been issued. This provision should be revised to make it consistent with the same provision in the Federal Major NSR rules (0030(4)).
In the introductory sentence to 0245 an “a” needs to be added before the word “source.”
It is not clear why 0245(2) begins with the phrase “If the owner or operator complied with subsection (1)(b).” Should it not simply say that if the increase is a major modification, then BACT must be applied?
OAR 340-225
Paragraph (2)(d) in 0020 Definitions needs to have the word “year” inserted between “calendar” and “2006.”
Paragraph (3) in 0020 Definitions needs to have the word “calendar” inserted before the second “year.”
The definitions of “Competing PSD increment consuming source impacts” and “Range of influence formula” need to be revised back to having a separate approach for analyses of impacts on Class I areas. The concept of a significant concentration gradient in the vicinity of the proposed source or modification is not relevant when defining the modeling domain for a Class I PSD increment analysis.
Regarding the change to the definition of “Source impact area” I need to check with the modelers to see if we are allowing something other than a circular area for purposes of defining the modeling region.
In 0060, I don’t see a provision that says what is required if subsection (2)(c) is not met. Both subsection (2)(b) and subsection (2)(d) say that they apply if the requirements of subsection (2)(a) are not met. The rule needs to include a provision that says what is required if the single source impact analysis test in (2)(c) is not net.
The reference to the significant impact levels in 0060(2)(c) should be to the Class II SILs since this provisions applies to AAQS and not increments. Of course, ODEQ can be more stringent and require that the impact be less than the Class I SILs.