View Rule

Statement of Need: In August 1992, EPA voluntarily initiated a comprehensive effort to reform the NSR process. This effort was initiated to examine complaints from the regulated community that the current regulatory scheme is too complex, needlessly delays projects, and unduly restricts source flexibility. Currently there are no applicable statutory or judicial deadlines for the NSR reform rulemaking effort. The goal of this effort is to address industries' concerns without sacrificing the environmental benefits embodied in the present approach; that is, protecting and improving local air quality, and stimulating pollution prevention and advances in control technologies. ^PIn July 1993, the New Source Review (NSR) Reform Subcommittee was formed under the auspices of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee. The Subcommittee's purpose is to provide independent advice and counsel to EPA on policy and technical issues associated with reforming the NSR rules. The Subcommittee was composed of representatives from industry, State/local air pollution control agencies, environmental organizations, EPA headquarters and regions, and other Federal agencies (Federal Land Managers, National Park Service and Forest Service), Department of Energy, and the Office of Management and Budget).

Summary of the Legal Basis: There are no applicable statutory or judicial deadlines for the NSR reform rulemaking effort. However, the rule will address two outstanding settlement agreements: CMA Exhibit B and Top-down BACT. The pending settlement on WEPCO may impose a judicial deadline on the rulemaking.

Alternatives: The Subcommittee discussed numerous options for implementing NSR reform. However, EPA's primary focus will be to consider the specific recommendations developed by the Subcommittee and, where appropriate, use them in this rulemaking effort. In January 1996, EPA, as part of another regulatory streamlining measure, merged portions of a separate rulemaking to implement the 1990 CAA Amendments with the Reform effort. The combined package was proposed in the Federal Register on July 23, 1996.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits: From a cost perspective, this rulemaking represents a decrease in applications and recordkeeping costs to industry of at least $13 million per year, as compared to the preexisting program, based primarily on the fact that fewer sources will need to apply for major source permits. In addition, the cost to State and local agencies will be reduced by approximately $1.4 million per year. The Federal Government should realize a savings of approximately $116,000 per year. Additional cost reductions, which are difficult to quantify, will be realized due to the streamlining effect of the rulemaking on the permitting process, for example, the opportunity costs for shorter time periods between permit application and project completion and reduced uncertainty in planning for future source growth.

Risks: This is a procedural rule applicable to a wide variety of source categories. Moreover, it applies to criteria pollutants for which NAAQS have been established. This action is considered environmentally neutral. However, any potential risks are considered in the NAAQS rulemaking from a national perspective.