B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X	Y	Z	AE	AF	AG	AH	AI	AJ	AK	AL
1
2			DEQ Rulemaking								Sunday, October 5, 2025
3										Workbook Summary
4			Air quality permitting "overhaul"
5			Title V and ACDP - air quality
6			Brief description of rule proposal					Worksheets				Do nothing severity rating
7			•make corrections, clarify existing rules and repeal unnecessary rules and implement permitting efficiencies consistent with breakthrough •provide regulatory relief to small and medium -sized sources in nonattainment areas and not yet designated nonattainment areas					1	Warm up
8								2	Basics				Risk rating low → high
9								3	Stakeholders				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
10								4	Program			5	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11								5	Environmental			0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
12								6	Timing				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
13								7	Financial			1	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
14								8	Legal				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
15								9	Technical				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
16								10	Policy				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
17								11	Political				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
18								12	Implementation				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
19
20			Ideal				Reality				Consequences
21			What we want to happen.				What we are trying to change.				What will happen if we don't change.
22			Make the program more efficient, easier to understand and implement, and provide aid for siting some businesses.				•The permitting rules are very complex but we can make them easier to use and make substantive progress on implementing breakthrough team recommendations. •The rules applying in nonattainment areas require prohibitively expensive controls when they may not be necessary and in some cases prevent consturction or modifications.				•DEQ staff and stakeholders struggle to understand and apply the existing permitting rules, resulting in wasted time and potentially incorrect application. Loss of institutional knowledge due to staff retirements in the permitting program will make rule corrections even harder in the future. Timeliness will not significantly improve if the permitting breakthrough recommendations are delayed. • Offsets and installation of expensive controls will be required longer than necessary in areas meeting air quality standards; •Larger sources in not yet designated nonattainment areas cannot build or modify.
23
24		Schedule						legislative session
25
26			2012				2013				2014
27			Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q1	Q2	Q3				Q4
28					<Start	---	---	---	---	Effective>
29							<AdvCom>
30									<Notice>
31										EQC
32			Alternatives considered				Research/data needed				Models
33			Do not adopt or delay rulemaking. Separate into different rulemakings for: breakthrough recommendations and aid for siting some businesses.				Talk with EPA about potential decision to approve proposed changes				EPA federal rules, permitting breakthrough team recommendations and previous Streamline Permitting Process Improvement Team 1 & 2 rulemakings.
34
35		7	Public involvement					Affected parties
36			Interest in this proposal is medium/high. DEQ plans to use our standing committee and estimates we will meet 4 times.We plan to ask the committee to provide fiscal, policy, and technical advice.					Business		4	affects hundreds currently regulated
37								Manufacturing		3	affects hundreds currently regulated
38								City/county/state		3	affects under 100 currently regulated
39								Individuals		0	not affected
40								Custom entry		3	affects under 100 currently regulated
41								Custom entry		0	not affected
42
43
44								The proposed rules involve
45		0	Environmental					Compliance			3	involved, not new or expanded
46			The proposed rules address an environmental problem indirectly. The environmental reach of the proposal is statewide The proposal aligns with 2 actions identified in the 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan and with 2 actions identified in the Natural Step.The environmental consequence of doing nothing is: see below.					Penalties			1	not involved
47								Permits, certifications			3	involved, not new or expanded
48								Fees			0	fees not involved
49								State Implementation Plan			3	involved
50								Land use rules			3	involved
51
52
53
54									Sunday, October 5, 2025
55

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I
1	⧀ Summary
2			1	Warmed up
3
4
5				Action	Object	Driver
6				improve	an external process	federal regulations			ï drop down Action/Object/Driver lists
7				simplify	existing regulatory program	program business decision
8				eliminate	rules for obsolete program	regulated community
9				reduce	workload	DEQ business decision
10				update	existing regulatory program	federal regulations
11				clarify	existing regulatory program	federal regulations
12
13
14
15				Discussion
16
17				Process improvement
18	Go to top
19					Sunday, October 5, 2025

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X
1	⧀ Summary
2			2	Basics		Air quality permitting "overhaul"
3
4				Brief Descrition of Rule Proposal
5				•make corrections, clarify existing rules and repeal unnecessary rules and implement permitting efficiencies consistent with breakthrough •provide regulatory relief to small and medium -sized sources in nonattainment areas and not yet designated nonattainment areas
6
7					Rulemaking type	permanent		Chapter 340 divisions			200 through 268
8				Strengths/weaknesses going into rulemaking
9					The proposed rule…			Risk option			Riskometer
10					Had prior public input			somewhat true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11					Is backed by science			does not apply			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
12					Is backed by data			somewhat true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
13					Would make DEQ's work easier			definitely true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
14					Would minimize DEQ costs			definitely true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
15					Furthers DEQ priorities			definitely true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
16					Supports strategic directions			definitely true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
17					Supports sustainability			definitely true			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
18
19
20							Risk average				1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
21				Ideal - What do we envision?
22				Short	Make the program more efficient, easier to understand and implement, and provide aid for siting some businesses.
23				Long
24				Reality - What are we trying to change?
25				Short	•The permitting rules are very complex but we can make them easier to use and make substantive progress on implementing breakthrough team recommendations. •The rules applying in nonattainment areas require prohibitively expensive controls when they may not be necessary and in some cases prevent consturction or modifications.
26				Long	•Procedural requirements in the definitions need to be moved to the appropriate division. Many rules like the Emission Reduction Credit and splitting sources rules need to be clarified. Portions of the breakthrough team recommendations also require rulemaking. •The process to redesignate a nonattainment area to a maintenance area can take up to 5 years. During this entire time, new and expanding point sources over 15 tons/year will need to install the most expensive control technology and obtain offsets (which are in scarce supply). However, our analysis shows that woodstoves are the main cause of nonattainment - not industry. We would like to explore a rule revision that would eliminate the most expensive control and offset requirements for sources that are below the federal major level of 100 tons/year. If this option can be done in a way that does not harm the environment and is approvable by EPA, then the Klamath Falls community and other nonattainment communities will not have industry penalized for woodstove smoke and will be more attractive to incoming industry. •This rulemaking is also necessary for the Lakeview area which is actually a nonattainment area but not designated as such. Larger new businesses and major modifications are not approvable because compliance with modeling requirements is impossible since the background concentration is already over the ambient air standard.
27				Consequences - What will happen if we do nothing?
28				Short	•DEQ staff and stakeholders struggle to understand and apply the existing permitting rules, resulting in wasted time and potentially incorrect application. Loss of institutional knowledge due to staff retirements in the permitting program will make rule corrections even harder in the future. Timeliness will not significantly improve if the permitting breakthrough recommendations are delayed. • Offsets and installation of expensive controls will be required longer than necessary in areas meeting air quality standards; •Larger sources in not yet designated nonattainment areas cannot build or modify.
29				Long
30				Alternatives to rulemaking already considered or to explore
31				Short	Do not adopt or delay rulemaking. Separate into different rulemakings for: breakthrough recommendations and aid for siting some businesses.
32				Long	See Consequences. If the Klamath Falls/Lakeview NSR/PSD rulemaking is separated out from the Permitting Breakthrough and AQ Rule Overhaul, the hours would be: NSR/PSD = 1100 hours; Breakthrough/Overhaul = 1500 with an additional 1000 hours to cover duplicative rulemaking processes such as stakeholder meetings, public notice, hearings, etc.
33				Research or data needed to develop proposal
34				Short	Talk with EPA about potential decision to approve proposed changes
35				Long
36				Models that could be leveraged for this proposal
37				Short	EPA federal rules, permitting breakthrough team recommendations and previous Streamline Permitting Process Improvement Team 1 & 2 rulemakings.
38				Long
39							Land Use/SIP
40							Land use rules			Y
41
42							State Implementation Plan			Y
43				Out of the scope for this proposal
44				Topic				Reasoning
45				We are not doing the attainment plan for Lakeview				Does not have EPA nonattainment designation
46
47
48
49				Compliance, penalties, permits, certifications, registrations and licensing
50						Extent that proposal addresses listed items

51
52				Compliance
53				Penalties
54
55				Air quality																			ï drop down to select category
56
57				Asbestos License
58				Air Contaminant Discharge Permit
59				Air Quality Registrations
60				Open Burning Letter Permit
61				Tanker Certification
62				Title V permit
63				Vehicle Emissions Certification
64				NESHAP
65				NSPS
66				Enter custom item here
67
68				Reminders
69
70				Process improvement
71
72								Sunday, October 5, 2025

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W
1	⧀ Summary
2			3	Stakeholders and public involvement			Air quality permitting "overhaul"
3
4				"The Legislative Assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that whenever possible the public be involved in the development of public policy by agencies and in the drafting of rules. The Legislative Assembly encourages agencies to seek public input to the maximum extent possible before giving notice of intent to adopt a rule. The agency may appoint an advisory committee that will represent the interests of persons likely to be affected by the rule, or use any other means of obtaining public views that will assist the agency in drafting the rule."
5				Affected parties
6							Previously		Number affected
7					Not involved	Involved	unregulated		10s			100s			1,000s
8				Business								X									ï drop down to X boxes
9				Manufacturing								X
10				City/county/state					X
11				Individuals
12				Custom entry					X
13				Custom entry
14				Stakeholder complexity
15
16
17				External stakeholder interest
18				Selecting an interest level indicates the group to the left is a stakeholder.
19				Group		Interest		Riskometer
20				Regulated community		considerable interest		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
21				Business and industry		considerable interest		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
22				Environmental groups		considerable interest		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
23				Public		moderate interest		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
24				State legislators		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
25				Federal environmental regulators		considerable interest		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
26				Other state and federal agencies		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
27				Local governments		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
28				Tribal nations		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
29				Custom entry		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
30				Custom entry		does not apply		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
31
32
33						Interest average		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
34				Optional stakeholder information
35				Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center will probably sue EPA on this rulemaking.
36	On Q-Net			Advisory committee appointment		Type of committee (check all that apply)
37				No advisory committee			Fiscal			Scientific
38				Use a standing committee			Policy			Rule language
39				Reconvene a committee			Technical			Legally required
40				Convene a new committee			Implementation			Custom entry
41				No. of meetings
42					4
43				Describe appointment strategy
44				Andy Ginsburg has regular round table meetings with business and environmental groups. We will use these groups as stakeholders.
45				Describe how DEQ will use their input
46				We will inform stakeholders of the direction we are going with the proposed rules changes and see if they agree.
47
48				Guide
49				Information meetings/hearings during public notice					ORS 183.333
50				Information meetings/hearings			Public notice

51				Portland area			No public notice
52				Regional			Public notice without hearing
53					No. of meetings		Public notice with hearing
54					1		Re-notice
55				Optional hearing information
56				Regional offices will be linked into one hearing held in Portland.
57				Reminders
58
59				Process improvement
60	Go to Top			Add check boxes for types of advice
61						October 5, 2025

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X	Y	Z
1	⧀ Summary
2			4	Program			Air quality permitting "overhaul"
3
4				Program name	Title V and ACDP
5
6				Media	air																	ï drop down Media list
7				Program consequences of doing nothing					medium													ï drop down Severity list		5
8							Severity		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
9				Loss of delegation																				FALSE
10				Failure to keep commitment																				TRUE	0
11				Failure to respond to legislature																				FALSE
12				Increased difficulty doing business																				TRUE	increased difficulty doing business,
13				Unclear administrative rules																				TRUE	unclear administrative rules and
14				Loss of reputation																				FALSE
15				Delay permitting breakthrough recommendations																				TRUE	delay permitting breakthrough recommendations
16				Enter custom consequences here																				FALSE
17				Subject program considerations																				If DEQ does not address this in rules, the program risks 0increased difficulty doing business, unclear administrative rules and delay permitting breakthrough recommendations.
18				New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration is permitted through the ACDP program and then rolled into a Title V permit, if necessary. Environmental groups may see this rule change as a relaxation even though we will have safeguards to make sure it isn't.
19				Other DEQ program considerations
20
21				Dependencies
22
23																								1	Cell to left must be unlocked
24
25				Include program considerations in:						potential for moderate complexity												ï drop down Complexity list
26							Complexity			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10					6	10
27				Committee charter																		ï drop down charter/map/proposal
28				Message map	Y
29				Proposal	Y
30				Reminders
31
32				Process Improvement
33
34							Sunday, October 5, 2025
35	Go to top

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	AA
1	⧀ Summary
2			5	Environmental			Air quality permitting "overhaul"
3
4			The proposed rules		address an environmental problem indirectly.																	ï drop down environmental correlation
5
6				Environmental consequences of doing nothing					does not apply
7							Severity		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10				ï drop down Severity list
8				Science does not apply to Oregon
9				Delay in public health protection
10				Adverse effect on vulnerable populations
11	DEQ - EJ			Adverse effect on environmental justice communities
12				See below
13				Enter custom environmental consequence here
14				Describe environmental considerations
15				A more efficiently run permitting program will help ensure that sources are meeting permit requirements designed to protect the environment.
16				Include environmental consideration in:						definitely not complex												ï drop down Complexity list
17				Committee charter				Complexity		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10			ï drop down charter/map/proposal
18				Message map	Y
19				Proposal	Y
20				Environmental reach
21				Select the most expansive environmental reach of this proposed rule.
22
23
24				Links
25				2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan
26				The proposed rules align with actions in the EPA Strategic Plan:
27				Taking Action on Climate Change/Improving AQ
28				Protecting America's Waters
29				Ensuring Safety of Chemicals/Preventing Pollution
30				Enforcing Environmental Laws
31				Cleaning Up Communities/Advancing Sustainable Development
32
33				the Natural Step
34				The proposed rules support the elimination of Oregon's contribution to:
35				The progressive buildup of substances extracted from the Earth's crust (for example, heavy metals and fossil fuels)
36				The progressive buildup of chemicals and compounds produced by society (for example, dioxins, PCBs, and DDT)
37				The progressive physical degradation and destruction of nature and natural processes (for example, over harvesting forests and paving over critical wildlife habitat)
38				Conditions that undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic human needs (for example, unsafe working conditions and not enough pay to live on)
39				Environmental data
40
41
42				Reminders
43
44				Process Improvement
45
46							Sunday, October 5, 2025
47	Go to top

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N	O	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X
1	⧀ Summary
2			6	Timing			Air quality permitting "overhaul"
3
4				Rational for developing proposal now - drivers
5				See Basics (what if you do nothing)
6				Include timing rational above in:							potential for moderate complexity												ï drop down Complexity list
7				Committee charter				Complexity			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10			ï drop down charter/map/proposal
8				Message map	Y
9				Proposal	Y
10						START		END
11						Year	Qtr	Year	Qtr														ï Year and Qtr drop down
12				Start		2012	3
13				Advisory committee		2013	1	2013	1
14				Rulemaking notice		2013	3	2013	3
15				EQC Action		2013	4
16				Effective		2013	4
17				NOTE: Consider the timing of the milestones above that may occur while the legislature is in session (Q1 of even years, Q1 and Q2 of odd years.)
18				Timing challenges
19				No challenge in meeting rule adoption		Compressed or extended timeframe for rule adoption					Difficult schedule, no contingencies allowed, uncontrolled changes to deadline likely
20
21				Reminders
22
23				Process Improvement
24	Go to Top
25								Sunday, October 5, 2025