Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule amendment
regarding extensions to the deadline to conduct performance tests.
In the proposed amendment to Part 63, Subpart A, the additional paragraph 63.7(a)
(4), notification is provided to the ?delegated agency? in (i), and the remaining
paragraphs (ii), (iii) and (iv) refer to the ?Administrator?. Please clarify the
difference intended here for the roles of the ?delegated agency? and
the ?Administrator?, if any.
Recall that historically there has been confusion in the general provisions
regarding actions delegated to the permit authority and actions/authorities retained
by EPA. Part 63 addresses both major sources of hazardous air pollutants as
well as area sources, and recently EPA excluded certain area sources from Title
V permit requirements. With these Title V excluded sources and many more area
source standards expected over the next few years, it is understandable why the
term ?permit authority? is not used in this proposed revision.
The term ?delegated agency? needs further clarity. For major sources Part 63
delegation is clear and often integral with delegation of Title V permit authority.
However delegation for area sources is less clear. Is programmatic delegation
under s. 112(l) adequate, or is source category specific delegation required? If
source specific delegation is required, how can a source determine what
categories are delegated and which are not? In Wisconsin, we have a 1999 letter
from Region V indicating we are delegated for several area source categories and
that this delegation will be announced soon in the federal register. We are still
waiting for that announcement. How is a small business area source, who is most
likely new to EPA regulatory programs, to determine if their source category is
delegated?
The term ?Administrator? also may also need further clarity. Under Part
63, ?Administrator? means the Administrator of the United States Environmental
Protection Agency or his or her authorized representative (e.g., a State that has
been delegated the authority to implement the provisions of this part). Again with
area sources, it is not clear if the state is the delegated authority. How is a
source to know? Also, a state may have general programmatic delegation and
therefore has the authority to ?implement the provisions of Part 63? in general, the
state may have refused delegation of the area source program due to lack of Title
V or other funding, or other reasons; and therefore would not get involved with
regulation of that source.
Many state and local environmental agencies may not have the resources to take
delegation of the area source program. In those cases the EPA Regions will
administer the area source program. Therefore, the term ?delegated agency? alone
does not work well for the purposes of the proposed rule. The
term ?Administrator? seems to work better, although it would be helpful to clarify
that the term only applies to the Administrator of the applicable source category,
rather than the Administrator of the major source MACT program.
Comment submitted by Roger Fritz, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
This is comment on Proposed Rule
Revisions to Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories
View Comment
Related Comments
View AllPublic Submission Posted: 08/11/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0085-0003
Nov 07,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 11/08/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0085-0007
Nov 07,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 11/08/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0085-0008
Nov 07,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 11/08/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0085-0010
Nov 07,2006 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 11/08/2006 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0085-0011
Nov 07,2006 11:59 PM ET