[Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards]EPA Operating Permits
                                               Program

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Summary of Final Action on Proposed
                            Revisions to Part 70

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 Disclaimer

The revised part 70 is currently in draft form and still under review
within the Environmental Protection Agency. Until the revised rule is
published in the Federal Register, all the information presented here is
subject to change. This is particularly true of approaches that the Agency
is considering as possibilities, which are indicated by the use of italics
in the summary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Summary of Final Action on Proposed Revisions
                       to Part 70 (Operating Permits)

             (Proposals of August 29, 1994 and August 31, 1995)

Status as of February 10, 1997


     --   Agency is approximately 1-2 months away from ending its review

     --   Publication of final rule anticipated by June-July, 1997

Purposes of rule

Streamline the permit revision processes

     --   Clarifies when a change at a facility needs a permit revision

     --   Describes which permit revisions are subject to public
          and EPA review

     --   Allows States to exempt smallest but most numerous permit
          revisions from public and EPA review and the citizen
          petition (via de minimis and notice-only tracks)

Address litigation issues on 1992 rule

     --   Requires permit revision at time of change, rather than
          at renewal as allowed under the "off-permit"
          provisions of current rule

     --   Resolves whether States must provide flexibility by granting
          emission caps and advance approval of changes

     --   Decides to what extent permit should provide a defense for
          violations during emergencies

     --   Determines how much company official should know about
          information on which compliance certification is based

Clarify implementation issues raised by stakeholders and others

     --   Special treatment of research and development (R&D) facilities

     --   Scope of EPA objection opportunity for new source review (NSR)
          requirements

     --   Clarifies major source determinations, including support
          facilities and fugitive emissions

Permit revision structure

Three permit revision tracks or "tiers"

     --   Amount of process between tiers varies with the environmental
          significance of the change

The top tier (significant permit revisions) requires 30-day public review
and 45-day EPA review

     Significant permit revisions include:

     --   New Source Review (NSR) and Prevention of Significant
          Deterioration (PSD) for major sources and major modifications

     --   Changes that escape major NSR or PSD through netting,
          if emission increases from the change exceed major
          source thresholds

     --   Case-by-case Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
          [sections 112(g) and (j)] and early reductions
          [section 112(i)(5)]

     --   Significant monitoring and testing changes

     --   Equivalent SIP limits, substitute 112(l) limits and
          streamlining established in the title V permit

The bottom tier (expedited permit revisions) is exempt from public review,
EPA veto and citizen petition

     Expedited permit revisions include:

     de minimis permit revisions

          --   if State shows that providing public review would be of
               trivial benefit

          --   applies to most changes subject to State minor NSR program

     "notice-only" ("notice & go" in the proposal) permit revisions

          --   for adding a requirement which:

               1)   was previously adopted after public and EPA
                    review, and

               2)   does not require the permit to establish case-by-case
                    requirements, such as monitoring

          --   for changes that can be made without prior approval by
               the permit authority, such as projects that are exempt from
               State minor NSR but subject to categorical limits.

          --   examples include: New Source Performance Standards
               (NSPS), National Emission Standards for Hazardous
               Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), Reasonably Available Control
               Technology (RACT), and categorical NSR rules, provided
               these meet the above criteria.

     administrative amendments, for administrative changes, and
      for initial incorporation of newly-promulgated MACT standards

Middle tier changes (minor permit revisions) are subject to public review
(EPA is considering a minimum of 21 days) and EPA review. EPA and public
review would start concurrently.

     Minor permit revisions include:

          --   nonmajor netouts (the emission increases from the
               project are significant, but less than major source
               thresholds)

          --   limits on potential to emit (PTE) to avoid major
               source requirements (e.g., major NSR or MACT)

          --   all other changes that are not subject to significant
               or eligible for expedited permit revisions

     --   EPA is considering ways to shorten EPA's review period for
          the middle tier.  As a possibility, the Agency may be able
          to end its review in cases where the public and EPA did not
          comment during the public comment period.

     --   EPA is also considering the possibility of allowing
          permit revisions, in limited cases, to occur prior to the
          end of public and EPA review.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Part 70 Revisions

Summary of Draft Positions on Major Issues

Netouts

     Major netouts would be classified as significant permit
revisions (top tier).  Major netouts are projects whose emission
increases -- without considering decreases -- would equal or exceed
major source thresholds (e.g., 100 tpy or greater for VOCs in moderate
nonattainment areas).

     Nonmajor netouts would be classified as minor permit revisions
(middle tier).  Nonmajor netouts are projects whose emission increases --
without considering decreases -- would be significant, but less than major
source thresholds  (e.g. 40 - 99 tpy for VOCs in moderate nonattainment
areas).

     States would not be allowed to include netouts in the de minimis
category. [However, the Agency is considering the possibility of
allowing small netouts in serious/severe ozone nonattainment areas to be
de minimis permit revisions provided that they do not involve PTE limits
to avoid major source requirements.]

Monitoring changes

     Except as indicated below, any significant change to a compliance
term which has not received prior public or EPA review would be a
significant permit revision.

     Changes to monitoring of PTE limits and changes to parameter ranges
for MACT standard [when not using an EPA-approved test] would be minor
permit revisions.

     The following monitoring changes would be exempt from public and
EPA review (through the de minimis or notice-only processes):

-    selecting alternative monitoring specified in an applicable
     requirement

-    incorporating alternative monitoring approved by EPA

-    changing the monitoring requirements for a unit classified as a
     de minimis permit revision

(EPA is also considering the possibility of allowing changes to
MACT parameter ranges to be de minimis permit revisions, and exempt
from public and EPA review, if the range is set using an EPA-approved
test.)

Potential to emit (PTE) limits

     PTE limits would be classified as minor permit revisions.  PTE
limits would also be prohibited from the de minimis category.

     Revising the PTE limit or revising compliance monitoring of a PTE
limit would also be a middle-tier change.

Operational flexibility

     The "off-permit" provision of the current rule would be eliminated.
Under the revised part 70, a permit revision would be required at the
time of the change, if the change triggers a newly-applicable
requirement (e.g., a modification subject to NSPS or MACT standards).
Current part 70 requires only a notice for these changes at the time
they are made, and does not require revision of the permit until the
next permit renewal.

     The revised rule would retain the current requirement for
emission caps independent of applicable requirements --
section 70.4(b)(12)(iii) -- provided a 7-day notice is made each time
a change is made under the cap.  As now, States would be required
to provide these caps when requested by a source.

     Revised part 70 would not require States to write permits with
plantwide applicability limits (PAL's), or conditions allowing advance
approval of projects subject to NSR, if it would require modification
of a State's NSR rules.  However, EPA would encourage States to provide
flexible permits within the framework of existing NSR rules.

De minimis changes

     States could exclude de minimis permit revisions from public
comment, EPA review and citizen petition.  To include changes in the
de minimis category, State must demonstrate that subjecting the
change to review would be of trivial benefit, based on either of the
following criteria:

     1)   the level of judgement involved in incorporating the change
          into the permit is trivial, or;

     2)   the size of emission increase and ambient impact from the
          change is trivial.

     Each criteria is an independent justification for de minimis
changes.   EPA approval of a State de minimis demonstration is required.

     States may presume that EPA would propose approval of changes
with emission increases below 25 percent of PSD significance level
(e.g., 10 tpy for VOC, 4 tpy for PM-10) as de minimis without a
demonstration.  States may adopt different cutoffs for the de minimis
category with a demonstration.  In addition, States could include changes
above the EPA or State cutoff in the de minimis category based on a
showing that the level of judgement needed to incorporate the change is
trivial.

     Netouts or PTE limits that avoid major source requirements
would be prohibited from the de minimis category (however, EPA is
considering allowing small netouts to be in the de minimis category
in serious/severe ozone nonattainment areas).

Notice-only Changes

     To qualify as notice-only, changes must involve a low level of
judgement, such as the incorporation of requirements previously
adopted after public and EPA review. The change could not involve
any source-specific tailoring of an underlying requirement,
e.g., MACT compliance parameters, compliance assurance monitoring
(CAM), or periodic monitoring.  Also, the change could not be
required to obtain approval by the permitting authority (e.g.,
change is not eligible if it must get a NSR permit).

     To make a notice-only change, the source would submit a notice
describing the change and identifying permit terms necessary to
comply with applicable requirements.  In certain cases,
notice-only procedures may be used where changes "conflict" with
existing permit terms, if the terms would no longer apply after the
change.  For example, if the status of applicable requirements
changes as a result of a physical change,  the notice-only process
can be used to add the new requirement and remove the old
requirement, provided the change meets the eligibility criteria in
the above paragraph.

     The revised part 70 would include a list of federal rules eligible
for notice-only which EPA determines have adequate monitoring and don't
require prior approval.

Emergency defense

     The revised part 70 would keep the current defense, but only for
State-adopted rules (e.g., State SIP limits).   For these, a permit
could provide a company with a defense against violations of
technology-based standards during emergencies.  The revised defense
would not apply to federally-promulgated rules, i.e., NSPS, NESHAPs and
MACT standards. [Current rule allows a defense for State and federal
rules.]

EPA review and objection

     EPA would not second-guess a State best available control
technology (BACT) decision in an NSR permit if: 1) it meets SIP
requirements governing establishment of BACT; 2) it is enforceable;
3) the NSR permit contains all other Act requirements that apply; and
4) the decision is reasonable and documented.  These limits on EPA's
objection would be codified in the revised part 70.

     Minor permit revisions would include a 45-day period for EPA
review, rather than a waiver of the review for 5 years, as proposed.
The Agency is considering ways to reduce delay in issuing minor
permit revisions (see summary of middle tier under permit
revision structure).

Compliance certification

     The revised part 70 would adopt certification language from the
water program (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System or
NPDES).  This language requires information to be prepared under a
"system" designed to properly evaluate it, and the certifying
official to make inquiry of those gathering the information.  This
approach would be used instead of the proposal to use certification
language from the acid rain program.

Research and development (R&D) activities


     The revised part 70 would allow States to consider an R&D
facility a separate source when located at a manufacturing facility.
Only if the R&D facility were major by itself (including any
facilities such as boilers supporting the R&D facility) would it be
subject to part 70.  R&D would be defined to include R&D activities,
but not teaching facilities, at educational facilities.  States would
be allowed to decide whether pilot plants meet the definition of R&D,
and the flexibility to allow streamlined calculations of PTE for R&D
activities.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For current information, or more details, contact Ray Vogel at 919-541-3153
or by e-mail at vogel.ray@epamail.epa.gov or Roger Powell at 919-541-5331
or by e-mail at powell.roger@epamail.epa.gov.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------