Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Wisconsin Construction Permit Permanency SIP Revision, 1994-1996 [E6-227]

Download as PDF 1994 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules The Agency will take no further action on the requested alternative action unless the commenter submits an appropriate petition for rulemaking. § 392.8 Expedited review. (a) A petition will receive expedited review by FSIS if the requested action is intended to enhance the public health by removing or reducing foodborne pathogens or other potential food safety hazards that might be present in or on meat, poultry, or egg products. (b) For a petition to be considered for expedited review, the petitioner must submit scientific information that demonstrates that the requested action will reduce or remove foodborne pathogens or other potential food safety hazards that are likely to be present in or on meat, poultry, or egg products, and how it will do so. (c) If FSIS determines that a petition warrants expedited review, FSIS will review the petition ahead of other pending petitions. § 392.9 Availability of additional guidance. Information related to the submission and processing of petitions for rulemaking may be found on the FSIS Web site at http://www/fsis.usda.gov/. Done at Washington, DC, on January 6, 2006. Barbara J. Masters, Administrator. [FR Doc. E6–172 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am] Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Partial withdrawal of proposed rule. AGENCY: erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. Reporting and Procedures Regulations: Cuban Assets Control Regulations; Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines; Partial Withdrawal SUMMARY: This document withdraws in part the proposed rule published on January 29, 2003, relating to the economic sanctions enforcement guidelines.1 In addition, in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register, the Treasury Department is issuing an interim final Jkt 208001 BILLING CODE 4810–25–P AGENCY: 31 CFR Part 501 15:01 Jan 11, 2006 Approved: December 23, 2005. Stuart A. Levey, Under Secretary of the Treasury, Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. [FR Doc. 06–277 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Wisconsin Construction Permit Permanency SIP Revision Office of Foreign Assets Control VerDate Aug<31>2005 Approved: December 22, 2005. Robert W. Werner, Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. [EPA–R05–OAR–2005–0563, FRL–8020–9] DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY FR 4422–4429 (2003). Partial Withdrawal of Proposed Rule The proposed rule (68 FR 4422–4429, January 29, 2003) is withdrawn with respect to ‘‘banking institutions,’’ as that term is defined in the interim final rule (‘‘OFAC Economic Sanctions Enforcement Procedures for Banking Institutions’’) amending 31 CFR part 501, appearing in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register. 40 CFR Part 52 BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P 1 68 rule—Economic Sanctions Enforcement Procedures for Banking Institutions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistant Director of Records, (202) 622–2500 (not a toll-free call). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Wisconsin on December 8, 2005. Wisconsin has submitted for approval into its SIP a statutory provision designed to ensure the permanency of construction permit conditions. EPA is proposing to approve this revision because it is consistent with Federal regulations governing State permit programs. This revision also addresses one of the deficiencies identified in EPA’s Notice of Deficiency (NOD), published in the Federal Register on March 4, 2004. (69 FR 10167.) DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 13, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2005–0563, by one of the following methods: PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • E-mail: Blakley.Pamela@epa.gov. • Fax: (312) 886–5824. • Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permit Section, (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. • Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permit Section, (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2005– 0563. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http:// E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM 12JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Susan Siepkowski, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353–2654, before visiting the Region 5 office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Siepkowski, Environmental Engineer, Air Permit Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–2654, siepkowski.susan@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows: I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? II. Background Information for This Action III. What Has Wisconsin Submitted? IV. Does This Submittal Comply With Federal Requirements? V. What Action is EPA Taking Today? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:01 Jan 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number). 2. Follow directions—The EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number. 3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. 4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/ or data that you used. 5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. 6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. 7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. 8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Background Information for This Action On March 4, 2004, EPA published a Notice of Deficiency for the Clean Air Act (Act) Operating Permit Program in Wisconsin. (69 FR 10167). The NOD was based upon EPA’s findings that the State’s title V program did not comply with the requirements of the Act or with the implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 70. One of the deficiencies raised in the NOD was related to the expiration of Wisconsin’s construction permits. 40 CFR 70.1 requires that each title V source has a permit that assures compliance with all applicable requirements, including any term or condition of any preconstruction permit issued pursuant to programs approved or promulgated under title I, including parts C or D of the Act. Title I of the Act authorizes permitting authorities to establish in permits source specific terms and conditions necessary for sources to comply with the requirements of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and New Source Review (NSR) programs. These permits must remain in effect because they are the legal mechanism through which underlying NSR or PSD requirements become applicable, and remain applicable, to individual sources. (May 20, 1999, EPA Memorandum from John Seitz). If the underlying construction permit expires, then the construction permit terms would no longer be applicable requirements to the source. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1995 Additionally, 40 CFR 52.21, the federal regulation governing the PSD program, provides at 52.21(w)(1), ‘‘[a]ny permit issued under this section or a prior version of this section shall remain in effect, unless and until it expires under paragraph (s) of this section or is rescinded.’’ Wisconsin statutes, Wis. Stat. 285.66(1), had provided that construction permits expire after 18 months. Consequently, EPA identified this as an issue in the NOD. Wis. Stat. 285.66 was previously numbered Wis. Stat 144.396 and had been approved into Wisconsin’s SIP on June 25, 1986 (51 FR 23056), prior to EPA’s approval of Wisconsin’s Nonattainment NSR program (January 18, 1995, 60 FR 3538) and Wisconsin’s PSD program (64 FR 28745, May 27, 1999). III. What Has Wisconsin Submitted? On December 8, 2005, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted to EPA for approval, the SIP revision ‘‘Request to the EPA to Revise Wisconsin’s SIP Pertaining to the Permanency of Construction Permit Conditions.’’ Wisconsin has revised its statutes to make permanent all conditions in construction permits. Wisconsin has revised Statute 285.66(1) to provide that, ‘‘[n]otwithstanding the fact that authorization to construct, reconstruct, replace, or modify a source expires under this subsection, all conditions in a construction permit are permanent unless the conditions are revised through a revision of the construction permit or through the issuance of a new construction permit.’’ This revision was adopted as part of the Wisconsin 2005–07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as 2005 Wisconsin Act 25. (Published July 26, 2005.) IV. Does This Submittal Comply With Federal Requirements? EPA reviewed Wisconsin’s December 8, 2005, SIP revision submittal to determine completeness, in accordance with the completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, and found the submittal to be complete. The next step in the review process was EPA’s analysis of the State’s submittal for compliance with Federal program requirements. Wisconsin’s SIP revision is necessary to correct a deficiency identified in the March 4, 2004 NOD. As noted in the March 4, 2004 NOD, title V generally does not impose new substantive air quality control requirements. Therefore, to be included in a title V permit, applicable requirements, such as terms in previously issued construction permits, must exist independent of the E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM 12JAP1 1996 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2006 / Proposed Rules title V permit. EPA’s approval of this SIP revision will ensure that construction permit terms are included as applicable requirements in Wisconsin’s title V permits, and will satisfy the deficiency identified in the NOD. Therefore, EPA has determined that this revision is approvable. V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Wisconsin SIP which will make permanent all terms of Wisconsin’s permits to construct, reconstruct, replace or modify sources unless the terms are revised through a revision of the construction permit or issuance of a new construction permit. EPA is also soliciting comment on this proposed approval. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Paperwork Reduction Act This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Regulatory Flexibility Act This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS Executive Order 13132—Federalism This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:01 Jan 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13045—Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. Executive Order 13211—Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy action,’’ this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). National Technology Transfer Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Absent a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 standards in place of a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTA do not apply. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by Reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Date: January 4, 2006. Gary Gulezian, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E6–227 Filed 1–11–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2005–MD–0015; FRL– 8021–1] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Revised Definition of Interruptible Gas Service Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment. This revision amends the regulation pertaining to the control of fuel-burning equipment, stationary internal combustion engines, and certain fuel burning installations. The revision clarifies the definition of ‘‘interruptible gas service’’. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 13, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2005–MD–0015 by one of the following methods: A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2005–MD– 0015, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM 12JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1994-1996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-227]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-0563, FRL-8020-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; 
Wisconsin Construction Permit Permanency SIP Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Wisconsin State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Wisconsin on 
December 8, 2005. Wisconsin has submitted for approval into its SIP a 
statutory provision designed to ensure the permanency of construction 
permit conditions. EPA is proposing to approve this revision because it 
is consistent with Federal regulations governing State permit programs. 
This revision also addresses one of the deficiencies identified in 
EPA's Notice of Deficiency (NOD), published in the Federal Register on 
March 4, 2004. (69 FR 10167.)

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 13, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2005-0563, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Blakley.Pamela@epa.gov.
     Fax: (312) 886-5824.
     Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permit Section, (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permit Section, 
(AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The 
Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2005-0563. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting 
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://

[[Page 1995]]

www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Susan Siepkowski, 
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-2654, before visiting the Region 5 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Siepkowski, Environmental 
Engineer, Air Permit Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-2654, siepkowski.susan@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
II. Background Information for This Action
III. What Has Wisconsin Submitted?
IV. Does This Submittal Comply With Federal Requirements?
V. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of 
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk 
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM 
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific 
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.

II. Background Information for This Action

    On March 4, 2004, EPA published a Notice of Deficiency for the 
Clean Air Act (Act) Operating Permit Program in Wisconsin. (69 FR 
10167). The NOD was based upon EPA's findings that the State's title V 
program did not comply with the requirements of the Act or with the 
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 70.
    One of the deficiencies raised in the NOD was related to the 
expiration of Wisconsin's construction permits. 40 CFR 70.1 requires 
that each title V source has a permit that assures compliance with all 
applicable requirements, including any term or condition of any 
preconstruction permit issued pursuant to programs approved or 
promulgated under title I, including parts C or D of the Act. Title I 
of the Act authorizes permitting authorities to establish in permits 
source specific terms and conditions necessary for sources to comply 
with the requirements of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) and New Source Review (NSR) programs. These permits must remain 
in effect because they are the legal mechanism through which underlying 
NSR or PSD requirements become applicable, and remain applicable, to 
individual sources. (May 20, 1999, EPA Memorandum from John Seitz). If 
the underlying construction permit expires, then the construction 
permit terms would no longer be applicable requirements to the source. 
Additionally, 40 CFR 52.21, the federal regulation governing the PSD 
program, provides at 52.21(w)(1), ``[a]ny permit issued under this 
section or a prior version of this section shall remain in effect, 
unless and until it expires under paragraph (s) of this section or is 
rescinded.''
    Wisconsin statutes, Wis. Stat. 285.66(1), had provided that 
construction permits expire after 18 months. Consequently, EPA 
identified this as an issue in the NOD. Wis. Stat. 285.66 was 
previously numbered Wis. Stat 144.396 and had been approved into 
Wisconsin's SIP on June 25, 1986 (51 FR 23056), prior to EPA's approval 
of Wisconsin's Nonattainment NSR program (January 18, 1995, 60 FR 3538) 
and Wisconsin's PSD program (64 FR 28745, May 27, 1999).

III. What Has Wisconsin Submitted?

    On December 8, 2005, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 
(WDNR) submitted to EPA for approval, the SIP revision ``Request to the 
EPA to Revise Wisconsin's SIP Pertaining to the Permanency of 
Construction Permit Conditions.'' Wisconsin has revised its statutes to 
make permanent all conditions in construction permits. Wisconsin has 
revised Statute 285.66(1) to provide that, ``[n]otwithstanding the fact 
that authorization to construct, reconstruct, replace, or modify a 
source expires under this subsection, all conditions in a construction 
permit are permanent unless the conditions are revised through a 
revision of the construction permit or through the issuance of a new 
construction permit.'' This revision was adopted as part of the 
Wisconsin 2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as 2005 
Wisconsin Act 25. (Published July 26, 2005.)

IV. Does This Submittal Comply With Federal Requirements?

    EPA reviewed Wisconsin's December 8, 2005, SIP revision submittal 
to determine completeness, in accordance with the completeness criteria 
set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, and found the submittal to be 
complete. The next step in the review process was EPA's analysis of the 
State's submittal for compliance with Federal program requirements.
    Wisconsin's SIP revision is necessary to correct a deficiency 
identified in the March 4, 2004 NOD. As noted in the March 4, 2004 NOD, 
title V generally does not impose new substantive air quality control 
requirements. Therefore, to be included in a title V permit, applicable 
requirements, such as terms in previously issued construction permits, 
must exist independent of the

[[Page 1996]]

title V permit. EPA's approval of this SIP revision will ensure that 
construction permit terms are included as applicable requirements in 
Wisconsin's title V permits, and will satisfy the deficiency identified 
in the NOD. Therefore, EPA has determined that this revision is 
approvable.

V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Wisconsin SIP which 
will make permanent all terms of Wisconsin's permits to construct, 
reconstruct, replace or modify sources unless the terms are revised 
through a revision of the construction permit or issuance of a new 
construction permit. EPA is also soliciting comment on this proposed 
approval.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. Executive Order 12866; 
Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as 
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator 
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements 
under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty 
beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded 
mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as 
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a state rule 
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act.

Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.

Executive Order 13211--Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use 
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary 
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are 
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Absent a 
prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus 
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for 
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with 
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of 
a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the 
Clean Air Act. Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTA 
do not apply.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by Reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Date: January 4, 2006.
Gary Gulezian,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
 [FR Doc. E6-227 Filed 1-11-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P