Notice of Resolution of Notice of Deficiency for Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Wisconsin, 9720-9723 [06-1797]
Download as PDF
9720
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
1104.12 Permit Content
1104.13 Inspections
1104.14 Federally-Enforceable
Permit Terms and Conditions
1104.15 Transmission of
Information to USEPA
1104.16 USEPA Oversight
1104.17 Emergency Provision
1104.18 Permit Termination,
Suspension, Reopening, and
Amendment
1104.19 Public Participation
1104.20 Administrative Permit
Amendment
1104.21 General Fee Provisions
1104.22 Air Pollution Control
Special Fund
1104.23 Application Fees for Air
Pollution Emission Sources
1104.24 Annual Fees for Air
Pollution Emission Sources
1104.25 Penalties and Remedies
1106 Standards of Performance for
Air Pollution Emission Sources
(2) SIP Revision. Guam shall adopt,
pursuant to required procedures, and
submit to EPA a revision to Guam’s SIP
that provides that a person shall not
violate a permit condition or term in an
operating permit that has been issued
under an EPA approved alternate
operating permit program adopted by
Guam pursuant the exemption
authorized in this § 69.13.
[FR Doc. 06–1740 Filed 2–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[WI–118–2; FRL–8037–5]
Notice of Resolution of Notice of
Deficiency for Clean Air Act Operating
Permit Program; Wisconsin
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of resolution.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice of
deficiency (NOD) on March 4, 2004 (69
FR 10167), in which EPA identified
problems with Wisconsin’s Clean Air
Act (Act) title V operating permit
program and a timeframe for the State
to correct these deficiencies. The
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) submitted
corrections to its permit program on
August 18, 2005, and revisions to a
related rule on December 8, 2005. This
document announces that based on
information provided by the WDNR,
EPA concludes that the State of
Wisconsin has resolved all of the issues
identified in the March 4, 2004, NOD.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
As a result, EPA will not impose
sanctions set forth under the mandatory
sanctions provisions of the Act. In
addition, EPA will not promulgate,
administer, and enforce a whole or
partial operating permit program
pursuant to the title V regulations of the
Act within 2 years after the date of the
finding of deficiency.
DATES: Effective February 16, 2006.
Because this notice of resolution is an
adjudication and not a final rule, the
Administrative Procedure Act’s 30 day
deferral of the effective date of a rule
does not apply.
ADDRESSES: The documents relevant to
the above action are available for public
inspection during normal business
hours at the following address:
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 Federal 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 Is the Background Information for
This Action?
II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and What Did
EPA Determine Regarding Each
Deficiency?
A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees to
Cover Program Costs
B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being
Used Solely for the Title V Program
C. Issuance of Title V Permits
D. Program Implementation Issues
III. What Action Is EPA Taking and What
Does This Mean?
I. What Is the Background Information
for This Action?
On March 4, 2004, EPA published a
NOD for the title V 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 in the
following four respects: (1) Wisconsin
had failed to demonstrate that its title V
program required owners or operators of
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
part 70 sources to pay fees sufficient to
cover the costs of the State’s title V
program in contravention of the
requirements of 40 CFR part 70 and the
Act; (2) Wisconsin was not adequately
ensuring that its title V program funds
were used solely for title V permit
program costs and, thus, was not
conducting its title V program in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR 70.9 and the Act; (3) Wisconsin had
not issued initial title V permits to all
of its part 70 sources within the time
allowed by the Act and 40 CFR 70.4;
and (4) Wisconsin had other
deficiencies with the implementation of
its permit program.
Wisconsin was required to address
these deficiencies within 18 months of
the date of the issuance of the March 4,
2004 NOD, or the state would be subject
to the sanctions under 40 CFR
70.10(b)(3) and section 179(b) of the
Act. In addition, 40 CFR 70.10(b)(4)
provides that, if the state has not
corrected the deficiency within 18
months of the date of the finding of
deficiency, EPA will promulgate,
administer, and enforce a whole or
partial program within 2 years of the
date of the finding.
II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and
What Did EPA Determine Regarding
Each Deficiency?
On August 18, 2005, WDNR
submitted to EPA the ‘‘Wisconsin DNR
Response to USEPA Notice of
Deficiency Related to the ‘Title V
Program’ dated March 4, 2004’’ (NOD
Response). The NOD Response is
available to view in the docket, Docket
ID No. WI–118–2. In the NOD Response,
and its accompanying attachments,
WDNR explained and documented how
each of the deficiencies identified in the
NOD had been, or were being,
addressed. The NOD Response contains
documented internal operational
changes within WDNR, a copy of the fee
structure included in Wisconsin’s 2005–
07 biennial budget bill enacted into law
as 2005 Wisconsin Act 25 (published
July 26, 2005), and numerous
attachments describing WDNR’s permit
program, program costs, fee structure,
and workload. Additionally, on
December 8, 2005, WDNR submitted to
EPA for approval, a SIP revision related
to one of the deficiencies, ‘‘Request to
the USEPA to Revise Wisconsin’s SIP
Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions’’
(Permanency Revision).
Based on the information in WDNR’s
NOD Response, and the Permanency
Revision to Wisconsin’s SIP, EPA has
determined that Wisconsin has
demonstrated that it has resolved each
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES
of the issues listed in the March 4, 2004,
NOD, as discussed below.
A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees To
Cover Program Costs
As discussed in the NOD, pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and 40 CFR
70.9(a), a state program must require
that the owners or operators of part 70
sources pay annual fees, or the
equivalent over some other period, that
are sufficient to cover the permit
program costs. 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and
40 CFR 70.9(b) provide that a state may
collect fees that cover the actual permit
program costs, or may use a
presumptive fee schedule, adjusted for
inflation.
In a 2001 title V program revision
submittal, WDNR disclosed that it had
removed the inflation adjustment factor
from its title V fee schedule. Instead of
providing for inflation adjustments,
Wisconsin’s fee schedule now required
the state to bill sources for each 1,000
tons of emissions in excess of the 4,000
ton cap allowed for by the presumptive
fee schedule provided by 40 CFR
70.9(b)(2)(ii)(B).
In light of this change, and, as
provided by 70.9(b)(5), EPA requested
from Wisconsin a detailed fee
demonstration to show its collection of
fees is sufficient to cover its permit
program costs. However, the
information subsequently provided by
Wisconsin did not adequately
demonstrate that the revised fee
schedule resulted in the collection of
fees in an amount sufficient to cover its
actual program costs, as required by 40
CFR 70.9(b)(1). Additionally, Section
502(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b),
and 40 CFR 70.4(b) provide that a state
must have adequate personnel to ensure
that the permitting authority can carry
out implementation of its title V
program. EPA also had serious
questions regarding the adequacy of
Wisconsin’s ability to fully implement
its title V program.
To address these issues, WDNR
provided in its August 18, 2005, NOD
Response, the required fee
demonstration. The fee information
includes a description of the State’s title
V fee structure, a description of the title
V permit program activities and costs, a
demonstration that its fee schedule
results in the collection of revenues
sufficient to cover the title V permit
program costs, and a description of the
activities funded by part 70 fees,
including personnel.
In its NOD Response, WDNR elected
to demonstrate that it collects fees that
cover the actual permit program costs,
rather than use a presumptive fee
schedule, adjusted for inflation, as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
allowed by 40 CFR 70.9(b)(5). WDNR
provided detailed information regarding
its program costs, which included,
among other things, a Workload
Analysis and a Fee Analysis for
Wisconsin fiscal years 2005–2008.
These documents describe the actual
costs of implementing Wisconsin’s title
V program, a breakdown of how the
costs were calculated, and permit funds
WDNR anticipates will be collected.
Additionally, the documents establish
WDNR staffing requirements, including
full time employee (FTE) hours needed,
and corresponding funding needs, that
WDNR concludes are necessary to
operate a complete stationary source
program over its fiscal years 2005–2008.
The analyses do not cover all aspects of
Wisconsin’s Air Program, but instead,
focus on the activities related to the
permit program. WDNR provided
further information regarding its permit
streamlining efforts, which, if
implemented as planned, will, over
time, continue to reduce the costs of
running its title V program beyond fiscal
year 2008, and will allow staff
redeployment.
Upon review of the information
submitted, EPA finds that WDNR has
demonstrated that it has adequate
staffing and funding levels to support a
complete title V program through
Wisconsin fiscal year 2008.
Accordingly, WDNR has demonstrated
that it collects fees that cover the actual
title V program costs. Thus, the State’s
program complies with the
requirements of the Act and 40 CFR
70.9. Also, based on the Workload
Analysis and the information regarding
its permit streamlining efforts, EPA
determines that WDNR is adequately
staffing its title V program. Accordingly,
Wisconsin is also complying with the
requirements of the Act and 40 CFR
70.4, and has resolved these issues
raised in the NOD.
B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being
Used Solely for the Title V Program
One of the issues identified in the
NOD was that the fee revenue
information that WDNR provided to
EPA in 2003 showed that the State was
not distinguishing between fees
collected from sources under different
operating permit programs. Specifically,
the information provided showed that
WDNR did not account separately for or
maintain separate accounts for fees
collected under title V and fees
collected from non-title V sources.
Section 502(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C.
7661a(b), and 40 CFR 70.9(a), which
provide that a state’s title V program
must ensure that all title V fees are used
solely for title V permit program costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9721
Additionally, 40 CFR 70.10(b)
provides that states must conduct
approved state title V programs in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CRF part 70 and any agreement between
the state and EPA concerning operation
of the program. Information provided to
EPA by WDNR in 2003 also disclosed
internal fee management deficiencies
that demonstrated that WDNR was not
conducting its title V program in
accordance with the requirements of the
Act and 40 CRF part 70 and, therefore,
was not adequately administering its
title V program.
In its NOD Response, WDNR provided
documentation which demonstrates that
it is using its title V fees only for title
V permit program costs. The fee revenue
information provided establishes that
the State is now distinguishing between
fees collected from sources operating
under different Clean Air Act permit
programs. Specifically, the information
shows that WDNR now accounts
separately for, and maintains separate
accounts for, fees collected under title V
and non-title V programs. This change
is the result of legislative changes
adopted as part of the Wisconsin 2005–
07 biennial budget bill enacted into law
as 2005 Wisconsin Act 25. (Published
July 26, 2005.) In 2005 Wisconsin Act
25, Wisconsin created a new
appropriation to separate title V from
non-title V funding and expenditures.
The expenditure authority for the title V
program specifies that permit fees be
collected from sources with operation
permits required under the Act. The
expenditure authority for the non-title V
program is for sources with state
operation permits not required by the
Act. Thus, the State now provides for an
accurate description and accounting of
its title V fee collections.
The NOD Response and its
attachments also demonstrate that
WDNR is using title V funds only for
title V work. EPA has evaluated the
information WDNR provided regarding
its accounting and timekeeping
practices, including FTE Hours, Time
Report Activities by Employees,
Activity and Funding Codes, and
changes to these activity codes to better
account for tracking and billing
employee time, and concludes that
WDNR has demonstrated that it is not
using title V funds to subsidize the work
of employees performing non-title V
work. Further, Wisconsin Act 2005 also
created a new fee structure for the nontitle V program to ensure that the nontitle V program work was self funded.
Accordingly, WDNR is ensuring that all
title V fees that it collects are used
solely for permit program costs as
required by 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b) and 40
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
9722
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
CFR 70.9(a). Thus, WDNR is conducting
its title V program in accordance with
the requirements of the Act and 40 CRF
part 70 and adequately administering its
title V program.
Regarding the potential grant
matching issue raised in the NOD,
WDNR has demonstrated it is not using
title V funds for grant matching.
Specifically, WDNR included in its
NOD Response, ‘‘FY05 Air Management
Activity Codes, Funding Source and Air
Pollution Control Grant Match
Eligibility,’’ which provides for each air
program activity the funding source and
whether it is eligible to use for 105 grant
match. As discussed above, by
separating the non-title V and title V
accounts, WDNR is able to specifically
track where the matching funds came
from to ensure title V funds are not
being used. Thus, EPA concludes that
WDNR has ensured that all title V fees
that it collects are used solely for permit
program costs, consistent with 42 U.S.C.
7661a(b) and 40 CFR 70.9(a).
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES
C. Issuance of Title V Permits
The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure
to comply with section 503(c) of the
Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661b(c), and 40 CFR
70.4, which require that a permitting
authority must act on all initial title V
permit applications within three years
of the effective date of the program.
Pursuant to section 503 of the Act,
Wisconsin was to have completed
issuance of initial title V operating
permits to all of its part 70 sources by
April 5, 1998.
In an October 23, 2003 letter to EPA,
‘‘Schedule for Completing Review of
Title V Operation Permits,’’ WDNR
provided a schedule for completing
issuance of its initial title V permits by
December 31, 2004. WDNR met this
commitment and finished issuing its
title V permits on December 30, 2004.
WDNR notified EPA of its completion in
a January 14, 2005, letter to EPA,
‘‘Update of Wisconsin Response to EPA
Notice of Deficiency.’’ Accordingly, EPA
concludes that WDNR has resolved the
NOD issue of failure to issue all of its
initial title V permits.
Additionally, WDNR has committed
to issuing all remaining initial Federally
Enforceable State Operating Permits
(FESOP) prior to March 4, 2006, with
the majority of these permits to be
issued by December 31, 2005. WDNR
provided in its NOD Response, ‘‘FESOP
Issuance and Other 2005 Operation
Permit Priorities,’’ which includes its
FESOP issuance strategy and deadlines.
On January 17, 2006, WDNR also
indicated to EPA that it completed
issuance of these FESOP permits.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
D. Program Implementation Issues
1. Expiration of Construction Permits
40 CFR 70.1 requires that each title V
source has a permit to operate that
assures compliance with all applicable
requirements. The definition of
applicable requirement includes 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. These permits must remain in
effect because they are the legal
mechanism through which underlying
preconstruction requirements become
applicable, and remain applicable, to
individual sources. If the construction
permit expired, then the construction
permit terms no longer would be
applicable requirements and the
permitting authority would not have the
authority to incorporate them into title
V permits. (See EPA’s May 20, 1999
letter from John Seitz to Robert
Hodanbosi and Charles Lagges.)
Wisconsin statutes, Wis. Stat
285.66(1), provided that construction
permits expired after 18 months.
(WDNR had also interpreted NR 406.12
to provide that construction permits
expired.) Because Wisconsin’s
construction permits expired, resulting
in terms in its title V permits that did
not have underlying applicable
requirements, Wisconsin’s title V
program did not meet the minimum
requirements of part 70.
In response to the NOD, Wisconsin
has revised Statute 285.66(1) to make
permanent all conditions in
construction permits. WDNR submitted
a SIP request, ‘‘Wisconsin SIP Revision
Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions’’ on
December 8, 2005. Statute 285.66(1) was
revised to provide that,
‘‘Notwithstanding 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 statutory
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.)
EPA reviewed Wisconsin’s December
8, 2005, SIP revision submittal and
determined it was approvable because it
makes Wisconsin’s construction permit
program consistent with Federal
program requirements for state permit
programs. This revision also resolves
the deficiency identified in the NOD.
EPA published its proposed approval of
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Wisconsin’s Permanency Revision on
January 12, 2006 (71 FR 1994), and no
comments were received. EPA signed
the final approval for this revision on
February 16, 2006, and has submitted it
to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication.
Unlike Wisconsin’s statute, its rule
governing the expiration of construction
permits, NR 406.12, provides that
‘‘[a]pproval to construct or modify a
stationary source shall become invalid
18 months after the date when a
construction permit was issued by the
Department unless the permit specifies
otherwise.’’ Therefore, no revision is
necessary to NR 406.12, since the rule
itself does not provide that the permits
expire.
Based on our final approval of
Wisconsin’s statutory change to make
all conditions in construction permits
permanent, EPA concludes that WDNR
has resolved this deficiency identified
in the NOD.
2. Combined Construction and
Operating Permits
The NOD discussed that states have
the option of integrating their preconstruction and title V programs as
described at 57 FR 32250, 32279 (July
21, 1992). Part 70 requires that, to
implement an integrated permit
program, the state permitting authority
must, among other things, comply with
the permit content requirements in 40
CFR 70.6, including the requirement to
specify the origin of and authority for
each term or condition in a title V
permit, and, ensure that the
construction permit conditions do not
expire, whether previously established
in a separate pre-construction permit, or
in the combined title V/pre-construction
permit.
Wisconsin has been issuing a version
of a combined construction and title V
permit for several years. However,
Wisconsin was not complying with the
requirements above in that it was not
identifying the construction permit
conditions or specifying the origin and
authority of these conditions in the title
V or combined permit. Furthermore,
Wisconsin did not have any provisions
to ensure that the construction permit
conditions were permanent.
In its NOD Resolution, WDNR
included an internal guidance
memorandum, ‘‘Interface Between
Construction and Operation Permits,’’
dated June 3, 2004. This memorandum
directs permit writers to identify
conditions from the construction permit
and specify the origin and authority of
these conditions in the title V permit. In
addition, the SIP revision discussed in
the previous section ensures that all
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
construction permit conditions are
permanent. Thus, WDNR has resolved
this deficiency identified in the NOD.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES
3. Federal Enforceability
The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure
to comply with 40 CFR 70.6(b), which
provides that all terms and conditions
in a title V permit are federally
enforceable, that is, enforceable by EPA
or citizens. However, the permitting
authority can designate as not federally
enforceable any terms and conditions
included in the permit that are not
required under the Act or under any of
its applicable requirements. 40 CFR
70.6(b)(2). In contrast, EPA has
determined that all conditions of a
permit issued pursuant to a program
approved into a state’s SIP are federally
enforceable. 40 CFR 52.23. (See the May
20, 1999 letter from John Seitz to Robert
Hodanbosi and Charles Lagges.)
Wisconsin had identified all permit
requirements in title V permits
originating from Wisconsin’s air toxics
program (Wis. Admin. Code NR 445) as
enforceable by the State only, even
when the requirements were established
in a permit issued pursuant to a SIPapproved program, such as a
construction permit. Wisconsin’s failure
to include the terms established in a
permit issued pursuant to a SIPapproved program into the federally
enforceable side of its title V permits
was contrary to 40 CFR 70.6.
In its NOD Resolution, WDNR
included the internal guidance
memorandum, ‘‘Interface Between
Construction and Operation Permits’’,
cited above. This memorandum directs
the permit writers to make federally
enforceable any requirement in the title
V permit that was included in the
source’s construction permit issued
pursuant to a SIP-approved program.
EPA has determined that WDNR has
addressed this program implementation
issue identified in the NOD.
4. Insignificant Emission Unit
Requirements
40 CFR 70.5(c) authorizes EPA to
approve as part of a state program a list
of insignificant activities and emission
levels (IEUs) which need not be
included in the permit application,
provided that the application may not
omit information needed to determine
the applicability of, or to impose, any
applicable requirement. Nothing in part
70, however, authorizes a state to
exempt IEUs from the permit content
requirements of 40 CFR 70.6.
Wisconsin’s regulations, at NR 407,
contain criteria for sources to identify
IEUs in their applications, and require
that permit applications contain
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 Feb 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
information necessary to determine the
applicability of, or to impose, any
applicable requirement. However,
WDNR did not include in its title V
permits federally enforceable applicable
requirements to which IEUs are subject.
Therefore, Wisconsin’s interpretation
and implementation of its regulations
was inconsistent with part 70.
WDNR included in its NOD
Resolution an example of a revised title
V permit template establishing the
changes it has implemented in order to
address this issue. WDNR has revised its
title V permits to include the source’s
IEU’s under the federally enforceable
portion of the permit. WDNR has also
included the requirements applicable to
the IEU’s as part of the general terms
and conditions for each permit. Thus,
EPA has determined that WDNR has
adequately addressed this program
implementation issue identified in the
NOD.
III. What Action Is EPA Taking and
What Does This Mean?
EPA is notifying the public that based
on the information provided by WDNR;
internal operational changes within
WDNR; and EPA’s approval of statutory
changes requested by Wisconsin, that
EPA has determined that Wisconsin has
resolved each of deficiencies identified
by EPA in the NOD for Wisconsin’s
Operating Permit Program, 69 FR 10167
(March 4, 2004). Therefore, based on the
rationale set forth above, EPA is not
invoking sanctions pursuant to section
179(b) of the Act, nor administering any
portion of the State’s operation permit
program, pursuant to 40 CFR
70.10(b)(4).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Operating permits, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 16, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 06–1797 Filed 2–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9723
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[FRL–8037–1]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Amendment
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA, also the Agency or we in
this preamble) today is granting a
petition to modify an exclusion (or
delisting) from the lists of hazardous
waste previously granted to Nissan
North America, Inc. (Nissan) in Smyrna,
Tennessee. This action responds to a
petition for amendment submitted by
Nissan to increase the maximum annual
volume of waste and to eliminate the
total concentration limits in its
wastewater treatment sludge covered by
its current exclusion. After careful
analysis, we have concluded the
petitioned waste does not present an
unacceptable risk when disposed of in
a Subtitle D (nonhazardous waste)
landfill. This exclusion applies to F019
wastewater treatment sludge generated
by Nissan at its facility in Smyrna,
Tennessee. Accordingly, this final
amendment conditionally excludes a
specific yearly volume of the petitioned
waste from the requirements of the
hazardous waste regulations under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) when the petitioned waste
is disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill
which is permitted, licensed, or
registered by a State to manage
municipal or industrial solid waste.
DATES: Effective Date: February 27,
2006.
The RCRA regulatory
docket for this final amendment is
located at the EPA Library, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta,
Georgia 30303, and is available for you
to view from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except on Federal
holidays. The public may copy material
from the regulatory docket at $0.15 per
page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general and technical information
concerning this final rule, please contact
Kris Lippert, RCRA Enforcement and
Compliance Branch (Mail Code 4WD–
RCRA), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, Sam Nunn Atlanta
Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9720-9723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1797]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[WI-118-2; FRL-8037-5]
Notice of Resolution of Notice of Deficiency for Clean Air Act
Operating Permit Program; Wisconsin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of resolution.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice of deficiency (NOD) on March 4, 2004 (69
FR 10167), in which EPA identified problems with Wisconsin's Clean Air
Act (Act) title V operating permit program and a timeframe for the
State to correct these deficiencies. The Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted corrections to its permit program on
August 18, 2005, and revisions to a related rule on December 8, 2005.
This document announces that based on information provided by the WDNR,
EPA concludes that the State of Wisconsin has resolved all of the
issues identified in the March 4, 2004, NOD. As a result, EPA will not
impose sanctions set forth under the mandatory sanctions provisions of
the Act. In addition, EPA will not promulgate, administer, and enforce
a whole or partial operating permit program pursuant to the title V
regulations of the Act within 2 years after the date of the finding of
deficiency.
DATES: Effective February 16, 2006. Because this notice of resolution
is an adjudication and not a final rule, the Administrative Procedure
Act's 30 day deferral of the effective date of a rule does not apply.
ADDRESSES: The documents relevant to the above action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the following
address: 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 Federal 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 Is the Background Information for This Action?
II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and What Did EPA Determine Regarding
Each Deficiency?
A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees to Cover Program Costs
B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being Used Solely for the Title
V Program
C. Issuance of Title V Permits
D. Program Implementation Issues
III. What Action Is EPA Taking and What Does This Mean?
I. What Is the Background Information for This Action?
On March 4, 2004, EPA published a NOD for the title V 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 in the following four respects: (1) Wisconsin had failed to
demonstrate that its title V program required owners or operators of
part 70 sources to pay fees sufficient to cover the costs of the
State's title V program in contravention of the requirements of 40 CFR
part 70 and the Act; (2) Wisconsin was not adequately ensuring that its
title V program funds were used solely for title V permit program costs
and, thus, was not conducting its title V program in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 70.9 and the Act; (3) Wisconsin had not
issued initial title V permits to all of its part 70 sources within the
time allowed by the Act and 40 CFR 70.4; and (4) Wisconsin had other
deficiencies with the implementation of its permit program.
Wisconsin was required to address these deficiencies within 18
months of the date of the issuance of the March 4, 2004 NOD, or the
state would be subject to the sanctions under 40 CFR 70.10(b)(3) and
section 179(b) of the Act. In addition, 40 CFR 70.10(b)(4) provides
that, if the state has not corrected the deficiency within 18 months of
the date of the finding of deficiency, EPA will promulgate, administer,
and enforce a whole or partial program within 2 years of the date of
the finding.
II. What Did Wisconsin Submit and What Did EPA Determine Regarding Each
Deficiency?
On August 18, 2005, WDNR submitted to EPA the ``Wisconsin DNR
Response to USEPA Notice of Deficiency Related to the `Title V Program'
dated March 4, 2004'' (NOD Response). The NOD Response is available to
view in the docket, Docket ID No. WI-118-2. In the NOD Response, and
its accompanying attachments, WDNR explained and documented how each of
the deficiencies identified in the NOD had been, or were being,
addressed. The NOD Response contains documented internal operational
changes within WDNR, a copy of the fee structure included in
Wisconsin's 2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as 2005
Wisconsin Act 25 (published July 26, 2005), and numerous attachments
describing WDNR's permit program, program costs, fee structure, and
workload. Additionally, on December 8, 2005, WDNR submitted to EPA for
approval, a SIP revision related to one of the deficiencies, ``Request
to the USEPA to Revise Wisconsin's SIP Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions'' (Permanency Revision).
Based on the information in WDNR's NOD Response, and the Permanency
Revision to Wisconsin's SIP, EPA has determined that Wisconsin has
demonstrated that it has resolved each
[[Page 9721]]
of the issues listed in the March 4, 2004, NOD, as discussed below.
A. Demonstration of Sufficient Fees To Cover Program Costs
As discussed in the NOD, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and 40
CFR 70.9(a), a state program must require that the owners or operators
of part 70 sources pay annual fees, or the equivalent over some other
period, that are sufficient to cover the permit program costs. 42
U.S.C. 7661a(b)(3) and 40 CFR 70.9(b) provide that a state may collect
fees that cover the actual permit program costs, or may use a
presumptive fee schedule, adjusted for inflation.
In a 2001 title V program revision submittal, WDNR disclosed that
it had removed the inflation adjustment factor from its title V fee
schedule. Instead of providing for inflation adjustments, Wisconsin's
fee schedule now required the state to bill sources for each 1,000 tons
of emissions in excess of the 4,000 ton cap allowed for by the
presumptive fee schedule provided by 40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(ii)(B).
In light of this change, and, as provided by 70.9(b)(5), EPA
requested from Wisconsin a detailed fee demonstration to show its
collection of fees is sufficient to cover its permit program costs.
However, the information subsequently provided by Wisconsin did not
adequately demonstrate that the revised fee schedule resulted in the
collection of fees in an amount sufficient to cover its actual program
costs, as required by 40 CFR 70.9(b)(1). Additionally, Section 502(b)
of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b), and 40 CFR 70.4(b) provide that a state
must have adequate personnel to ensure that the permitting authority
can carry out implementation of its title V program. EPA also had
serious questions regarding the adequacy of Wisconsin's ability to
fully implement its title V program.
To address these issues, WDNR provided in its August 18, 2005, NOD
Response, the required fee demonstration. The fee information includes
a description of the State's title V fee structure, a description of
the title V permit program activities and costs, a demonstration that
its fee schedule results in the collection of revenues sufficient to
cover the title V permit program costs, and a description of the
activities funded by part 70 fees, including personnel.
In its NOD Response, WDNR elected to demonstrate that it collects
fees that cover the actual permit program costs, rather than use a
presumptive fee schedule, adjusted for inflation, as allowed by 40 CFR
70.9(b)(5). WDNR provided detailed information regarding its program
costs, which included, among other things, a Workload Analysis and a
Fee Analysis for Wisconsin fiscal years 2005-2008. These documents
describe the actual costs of implementing Wisconsin's title V program,
a breakdown of how the costs were calculated, and permit funds WDNR
anticipates will be collected. Additionally, the documents establish
WDNR staffing requirements, including full time employee (FTE) hours
needed, and corresponding funding needs, that WDNR concludes are
necessary to operate a complete stationary source program over its
fiscal years 2005-2008. The analyses do not cover all aspects of
Wisconsin's Air Program, but instead, focus on the activities related
to the permit program. WDNR provided further information regarding its
permit streamlining efforts, which, if implemented as planned, will,
over time, continue to reduce the costs of running its title V program
beyond fiscal year 2008, and will allow staff redeployment.
Upon review of the information submitted, EPA finds that WDNR has
demonstrated that it has adequate staffing and funding levels to
support a complete title V program through Wisconsin fiscal year 2008.
Accordingly, WDNR has demonstrated that it collects fees that cover the
actual title V program costs. Thus, the State's program complies with
the requirements of the Act and 40 CFR 70.9. Also, based on the
Workload Analysis and the information regarding its permit streamlining
efforts, EPA determines that WDNR is adequately staffing its title V
program. Accordingly, Wisconsin is also complying with the requirements
of the Act and 40 CFR 70.4, and has resolved these issues raised in the
NOD.
B. Demonstration of Title V Fees Being Used Solely for the Title V
Program
One of the issues identified in the NOD was that the fee revenue
information that WDNR provided to EPA in 2003 showed that the State was
not distinguishing between fees collected from sources under different
operating permit programs. Specifically, the information provided
showed that WDNR did not account separately for or maintain separate
accounts for fees collected under title V and fees collected from non-
title V sources. Section 502(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b), and 40
CFR 70.9(a), which provide that a state's title V program must ensure
that all title V fees are used solely for title V permit program costs.
Additionally, 40 CFR 70.10(b) provides that states must conduct
approved state title V programs in accordance with the requirements of
40 CRF part 70 and any agreement between the state and EPA concerning
operation of the program. Information provided to EPA by WDNR in 2003
also disclosed internal fee management deficiencies that demonstrated
that WDNR was not conducting its title V program in accordance with the
requirements of the Act and 40 CRF part 70 and, therefore, was not
adequately administering its title V program.
In its NOD Response, WDNR provided documentation which demonstrates
that it is using its title V fees only for title V permit program
costs. The fee revenue information provided establishes that the State
is now distinguishing between fees collected from sources operating
under different Clean Air Act permit programs. Specifically, the
information shows that WDNR now accounts separately for, and maintains
separate accounts for, fees collected under title V and non-title V
programs. This change is the result of legislative changes adopted as
part of the Wisconsin 2005-07 biennial budget bill enacted into law as
2005 Wisconsin Act 25. (Published July 26, 2005.) In 2005 Wisconsin Act
25, Wisconsin created a new appropriation to separate title V from non-
title V funding and expenditures. The expenditure authority for the
title V program specifies that permit fees be collected from sources
with operation permits required under the Act. The expenditure
authority for the non-title V program is for sources with state
operation permits not required by the Act. Thus, the State now provides
for an accurate description and accounting of its title V fee
collections.
The NOD Response and its attachments also demonstrate that WDNR is
using title V funds only for title V work. EPA has evaluated the
information WDNR provided regarding its accounting and timekeeping
practices, including FTE Hours, Time Report Activities by Employees,
Activity and Funding Codes, and changes to these activity codes to
better account for tracking and billing employee time, and concludes
that WDNR has demonstrated that it is not using title V funds to
subsidize the work of employees performing non-title V work. Further,
Wisconsin Act 2005 also created a new fee structure for the non-title V
program to ensure that the non-title V program work was self funded.
Accordingly, WDNR is ensuring that all title V fees that it collects
are used solely for permit program costs as required by 42 U.S.C.
7661a(b) and 40
[[Page 9722]]
CFR 70.9(a). Thus, WDNR is conducting its title V program in accordance
with the requirements of the Act and 40 CRF part 70 and adequately
administering its title V program.
Regarding the potential grant matching issue raised in the NOD,
WDNR has demonstrated it is not using title V funds for grant matching.
Specifically, WDNR included in its NOD Response, ``FY05 Air Management
Activity Codes, Funding Source and Air Pollution Control Grant Match
Eligibility,'' which provides for each air program activity the funding
source and whether it is eligible to use for 105 grant match. As
discussed above, by separating the non-title V and title V accounts,
WDNR is able to specifically track where the matching funds came from
to ensure title V funds are not being used. Thus, EPA concludes that
WDNR has ensured that all title V fees that it collects are used solely
for permit program costs, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 7661a(b) and 40 CFR
70.9(a).
C. Issuance of Title V Permits
The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure to comply with section 503(c)
of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661b(c), and 40 CFR 70.4, which require that a
permitting authority must act on all initial title V permit
applications within three years of the effective date of the program.
Pursuant to section 503 of the Act, Wisconsin was to have completed
issuance of initial title V operating permits to all of its part 70
sources by April 5, 1998.
In an October 23, 2003 letter to EPA, ``Schedule for Completing
Review of Title V Operation Permits,'' WDNR provided a schedule for
completing issuance of its initial title V permits by December 31,
2004. WDNR met this commitment and finished issuing its title V permits
on December 30, 2004. WDNR notified EPA of its completion in a January
14, 2005, letter to EPA, ``Update of Wisconsin Response to EPA Notice
of Deficiency.'' Accordingly, EPA concludes that WDNR has resolved the
NOD issue of failure to issue all of its initial title V permits.
Additionally, WDNR has committed to issuing all remaining initial
Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits (FESOP) prior to March 4,
2006, with the majority of these permits to be issued by December 31,
2005. WDNR provided in its NOD Response, ``FESOP Issuance and Other
2005 Operation Permit Priorities,'' which includes its FESOP issuance
strategy and deadlines. On January 17, 2006, WDNR also indicated to EPA
that it completed issuance of these FESOP permits.
D. Program Implementation Issues
1. Expiration of Construction Permits
40 CFR 70.1 requires that each title V source has a permit to
operate that assures compliance with all applicable requirements. The
definition of applicable requirement includes 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. These
permits must remain in effect because they are the legal mechanism
through which underlying preconstruction requirements become
applicable, and remain applicable, to individual sources. If the
construction permit expired, then the construction permit terms no
longer would be applicable requirements and the permitting authority
would not have the authority to incorporate them into title V permits.
(See EPA's May 20, 1999 letter from John Seitz to Robert Hodanbosi and
Charles Lagges.)
Wisconsin statutes, Wis. Stat 285.66(1), provided that construction
permits expired after 18 months. (WDNR had also interpreted NR 406.12
to provide that construction permits expired.) Because Wisconsin's
construction permits expired, resulting in terms in its title V permits
that did not have underlying applicable requirements, Wisconsin's title
V program did not meet the minimum requirements of part 70.
In response to the NOD, Wisconsin has revised Statute 285.66(1) to
make permanent all conditions in construction permits. WDNR submitted a
SIP request, ``Wisconsin SIP Revision Pertaining to the Permanency of
Construction Permit Conditions'' on December 8, 2005. Statute 285.66(1)
was revised to provide that, ``Notwithstanding 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 statutory 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.)
EPA reviewed Wisconsin's December 8, 2005, SIP revision submittal
and determined it was approvable because it makes Wisconsin's
construction permit program consistent with Federal program
requirements for state permit programs. This revision also resolves the
deficiency identified in the NOD. EPA published its proposed approval
of Wisconsin's Permanency Revision on January 12, 2006 (71 FR 1994),
and no comments were received. EPA signed the final approval for this
revision on February 16, 2006, and has submitted it to the Office of
the Federal Register for publication.
Unlike Wisconsin's statute, its rule governing the expiration of
construction permits, NR 406.12, provides that ``[a]pproval to
construct or modify a stationary source shall become invalid 18 months
after the date when a construction permit was issued by the Department
unless the permit specifies otherwise.'' Therefore, no revision is
necessary to NR 406.12, since the rule itself does not provide that the
permits expire.
Based on our final approval of Wisconsin's statutory change to make
all conditions in construction permits permanent, EPA concludes that
WDNR has resolved this deficiency identified in the NOD.
2. Combined Construction and Operating Permits
The NOD discussed that states have the option of integrating their
pre-construction and title V programs as described at 57 FR 32250,
32279 (July 21, 1992). Part 70 requires that, to implement an
integrated permit program, the state permitting authority must, among
other things, comply with the permit content requirements in 40 CFR
70.6, including the requirement to specify the origin of and authority
for each term or condition in a title V permit, and, ensure that the
construction permit conditions do not expire, whether previously
established in a separate pre-construction permit, or in the combined
title V/pre-construction permit.
Wisconsin has been issuing a version of a combined construction and
title V permit for several years. However, Wisconsin was not complying
with the requirements above in that it was not identifying the
construction permit conditions or specifying the origin and authority
of these conditions in the title V or combined permit. Furthermore,
Wisconsin did not have any provisions to ensure that the construction
permit conditions were permanent.
In its NOD Resolution, WDNR included an internal guidance
memorandum, ``Interface Between Construction and Operation Permits,''
dated June 3, 2004. This memorandum directs permit writers to identify
conditions from the construction permit and specify the origin and
authority of these conditions in the title V permit. In addition, the
SIP revision discussed in the previous section ensures that all
[[Page 9723]]
construction permit conditions are permanent. Thus, WDNR has resolved
this deficiency identified in the NOD.
3. Federal Enforceability
The NOD cited Wisconsin for failure to comply with 40 CFR 70.6(b),
which provides that all terms and conditions in a title V permit are
federally enforceable, that is, enforceable by EPA or citizens.
However, the permitting authority can designate as not federally
enforceable any terms and conditions included in the permit that are
not required under the Act or under any of its applicable requirements.
40 CFR 70.6(b)(2). In contrast, EPA has determined that all conditions
of a permit issued pursuant to a program approved into a state's SIP
are federally enforceable. 40 CFR 52.23. (See the May 20, 1999 letter
from John Seitz to Robert Hodanbosi and Charles Lagges.)
Wisconsin had identified all permit requirements in title V permits
originating from Wisconsin's air toxics program (Wis. Admin. Code NR
445) as enforceable by the State only, even when the requirements were
established in a permit issued pursuant to a SIP-approved program, such
as a construction permit. Wisconsin's failure to include the terms
established in a permit issued pursuant to a SIP-approved program into
the federally enforceable side of its title V permits was contrary to
40 CFR 70.6.
In its NOD Resolution, WDNR included the internal guidance
memorandum, ``Interface Between Construction and Operation Permits'',
cited above. This memorandum directs the permit writers to make
federally enforceable any requirement in the title V permit that was
included in the source's construction permit issued pursuant to a SIP-
approved program. EPA has determined that WDNR has addressed this
program implementation issue identified in the NOD.
4. Insignificant Emission Unit Requirements
40 CFR 70.5(c) authorizes EPA to approve as part of a state program
a list of insignificant activities and emission levels (IEUs) which
need not be included in the permit application, provided that the
application may not omit information needed to determine the
applicability of, or to impose, any applicable requirement. Nothing in
part 70, however, authorizes a state to exempt IEUs from the permit
content requirements of 40 CFR 70.6.
Wisconsin's regulations, at NR 407, contain criteria for sources to
identify IEUs in their applications, and require that permit
applications contain information necessary to determine the
applicability of, or to impose, any applicable requirement. However,
WDNR did not include in its title V permits federally enforceable
applicable requirements to which IEUs are subject. Therefore,
Wisconsin's interpretation and implementation of its regulations was
inconsistent with part 70.
WDNR included in its NOD Resolution an example of a revised title V
permit template establishing the changes it has implemented in order to
address this issue. WDNR has revised its title V permits to include the
source's IEU's under the federally enforceable portion of the permit.
WDNR has also included the requirements applicable to the IEU's as part
of the general terms and conditions for each permit. Thus, EPA has
determined that WDNR has adequately addressed this program
implementation issue identified in the NOD.
III. What Action Is EPA Taking and What Does This Mean?
EPA is notifying the public that based on the information provided
by WDNR; internal operational changes within WDNR; and EPA's approval
of statutory changes requested by Wisconsin, that EPA has determined
that Wisconsin has resolved each of deficiencies identified by EPA in
the NOD for Wisconsin's Operating Permit Program, 69 FR 10167 (March 4,
2004). Therefore, based on the rationale set forth above, EPA is not
invoking sanctions pursuant to section 179(b) of the Act, nor
administering any portion of the State's operation permit program,
pursuant to 40 CFR 70.10(b)(4).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 16, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 06-1797 Filed 2-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P