D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 20, r. 20-209

Current through Register 71, No. 45, November 7, 2024

Rule 20-209 - PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES (MINOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW)

209.1

Effective January 1, 2014, except as specified in § 209.2, the requirements of this section are applicable to any source required to obtain a permit under § 200 to construct a new stationary source, modify an existing stationary source, or install or modify an air pollution control device on a stationary source that results in collateral emission increases, for a project that:

(a) Is not required to comply with the requirements of either § 204 or § 208; and

(b) Results in an increase of the potential to emit rate equal to or greater than five tons per year (5 Tpy) from an individual unit of any of the following:

(1) Total volatile organic compounds (VOC_s);

(2) Nitrogen oxides (NO_x);

(3) Sulfur dioxide (SO₂);

(4) Particulate matter less than ten (10) microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM₁₀);

(5) Fine particulate matter less than two and a half (2.5) microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM_2.5); and

(6) An aggregate of any of the hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) listed in § 112(b) of the Clean Air Act.

209.2

Any source applying for a permit under § 200 not meeting the applicability requirements specified in § 209.1 shall submit, with their application, sufficient documentation to show that the proposed source does not meet those applicability requirements.

209.3

Any source meeting the applicability requirements specified in § 209.1 shall, relative to each pollutant for which it meets the applicability requirement, be controlled by operating emission control technologies or pollution prevention methodologies that limit emissions to the atmosphere meeting one (1) or more of the following requirements:

(a) The lowest achievable emission rate (LAER);

(b) The best available control technology (BACT);

(c) For an air contaminant that is a HAP, the requirements of a maximum achievable control technology (MACT) or other standard resulting from a residual risk determination promulgated under 40 C.F.R. part 63 or, where applicable, a more stringent standard adopted under this title;

(d) An emission control technology or pollution prevention methodology approved in advance by the Department for a similar source pursuant to this section; or

(e) An emission control technology or pollution prevention methodology approved by the Department, on a case-by-case basis, pursuant to § 209.4.

209.4

A case-by-case determination pursuant to § 209.3(e) shall be performed by completing the following steps:

(a) Identify and evaluate a list of air pollution technologies and pollution prevention methodologies that may be applied to the source including, but not limited to, technologies and methodologies used for similar sources, innovative control technologies, modification of the process or process equipment, other pollution prevention measures, and combinations of the above measures;

(b) Arrange the measures on the list in descending order of air pollution control effectiveness; and

(c) Chose and propose the top-rated measure on the list not eliminated from consideration as a result of one (1) of the following demonstrations:

(1) Where a demonstration can be and is made that this measure is technically infeasible, based on physical, chemical, or engineering principles, and/or technical difficulties that would prevent the successful application of the measure;

(2) Where a demonstration can be and is made that this measure has adverse environmental effects (for example effects on water or land, HAP emissions, or increased environmental hazards) when compared with its air contaminant emission reduction benefits, which would make use of this measure unreasonable;

(3) Where a demonstration can be and is made that this measure should be eliminated from consideration based on its calculated economic impacts using the techniques in the latest edition of EPA's Control Cost Manual, where the total and incremental costs of the top measure are greater than the total and incremental costs of the proposed measure(s) and that the extra costs, when compared with the air contaminant emission reduction benefits resulting from the top measure would make use of the top measure unreasonable; or

(4) Where a demonstration can be and is made that this measure should be eliminated from consideration based on its energy impacts such as establishment that it relies on fuels that are not reliably available; or that the energy consumed by the top measure is greater than that consumed by the proposed measure(s), and that the extra energy used, when compared with the air contaminant emission reduction benefits resulting from the top measure would make use of that measure unreasonable.

209.5

Any application submitted pursuant to the requirements of this section shall contain the following:

(a) The control technology or pollution prevention methodology proposed to be installed and operated to meet the requirements of § 209.3;

(b) The list, if this method was chosen, generated pursuant to § 209.4;

(c) Any demonstration(s) performed pursuant to § 209.4(c); and

(d) Any additional information that the Department requests in order to complete an evaluation of the proposal.

D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 20, r. 20-209

Final Rulemaking published at 59 DCR 13044 (November 16, 2012)

Authority: Sections 5 and 6(b) of the District of Columbia Air Pollution Control Act of 1984, as amended, effective March 15, 1986 (D.C. Law 5-165; D.C. Official Code §§ 8-101.05 and 8-101.06(b) (2008 Repl.); Section 107(4) of the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005, effective February 15, 2006 (D.C. Law 16-51; D.C. Official Code § 8-151.07(4) (2008 Repl.); Mayor's Order 98-44, dated April 10, 1998; and Mayor's Order 2006-61, dated June 14, 2006.