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 https://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
• https://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 https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://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 https://
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 https://
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 https://
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 https://
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. https://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:
https://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
https://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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://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 https://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 https://
[[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 https://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
https://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