Comment submitted by Roger Fritz, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

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.