State of Wisconsin 

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

101 S. Webster Street 

Box 7921 

Madison WI 53707-7921 

June 20,2012 

George T. Czerniak, Acting Director 

Air and Radiation Division 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region V 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago IL 60604-3507 

Scott Walker, Governor 

Cathy Stepp, Secretary 

Telephone 608-266-2621 

Toll Free 1-888-936-7463 

TTY Access via relay- 71 1 

Subject: Revisions to Wisconsin's New Source Review State Implementation Plan 

Dear Mr. Czerniak: 

The Wisconsin Department ofNatural Resources (WDNR) hereby submits a revision to its cun·ent new source 

review State Implementation Plan (SIP) for sections 285.60(3m) and 285.63(3m), Wis. State Statute as published 

and effective on April 16,2012. These statutes were created to allow WDNR to utilize the federal deferral for 

C02 emissions fro:n bioenergy and other biogenic sources under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

permitting program. 

With this letter we are submitting the state statute and supporting documentation as a formal SIP revision. WDNR 

requests EPA process this SIP submittal as soon as possible so that permitted sources benefit from the relief 

provided in the EPA rule for the remaining time the deferra l is in effect. 

If you should have any questions regarding this submitta l, please call Andrew Stewart of my staff at 608 266-

6876 or email him at andrew.stewart@wisconsin.gov. 

Sincerely, 

0 r4- Batt Sponseller, Director 

Bureau of Air Management 

Attachments: 

A- GHG_SIP _biogenic_checklist.doc 

B- GHG_SIP _biogenic_certification.pdf 

C - GHG_SIP _biogenic_signed_hearing_notice_pdf 

D - Wis_Act_ l 7 1.pdf 

E- Wis_state...:.statute_285_60.pdf 

F - Wis _state_ statute_ 285 _ 63 .pdf 

G- GHG_SIP _biogenic_webpage.doc 

H - RE: Notice of Public Hearing.msg 

I - GHG _SIP_ biogenic _public_ comment_ memo.doc 

cc: Andrew Stewatt-AM/7 (e-copy) 

Ralph Patterson-AM/7 (e-copy) 

dnr.wi.gov 

wisconsin.gov Naturally WISCONSIN 0 PRINTEO 

ONRECYctEO PAPER 
EPA Region V

Wisconsin SIP Submittal

Completeness Review

Submittal Letter

1. Signed by Governor’s Designee (Bart Sponseller)? Yes _X__ No ___

2. Date of Submittal ___June 18, 2012___________________________________

3. WDNR Person in charge of SIP submittal. 

Name __Ralph Patterson___ Telephone __608-267-7546___

FAX Number ___608-267-0560___ 

E-MAIL Address___ralph.patterson@wi.gov_____________

4. WDNR Technical Person in charge of answering questions on SIP Submittal

Name __Andrew Stewart___ Telephone __608-266-6876___

FAX Number ___608-267-0560___ 

E-MAIL Address___andrew.stewart@wi.gov_____________

Incorporation Into Wisconsin Administrative Code

5. Is evidence that the State incorporated the revision into the Wisconsin Administrative Code supplied in this 

SIP package?

Yes __

No_X_ if No explain.

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program.

6. The effective date of the regulation is or was ___April 16, 2012_______

7. Are test methods/rules incorporated by reference correctly? (Has approval been obtained from the state 

Attorney General

Yes_______

No_______

Not applicable ___X____

For No and Not applicable explain answer.

No test methods in statute.

8. Has WDNR provided evidence that it has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement 

the revision?

Yes ___X____

No _______

Additional Explanation (if necessary).
2

9. Did the State include a copy of the actual regulation or document for USEPA review?

Yes _X___

No_____

Additional Explanation (if necessary).

10. Did the State provide evidence that it followed all of the requirements of its Administrative Procedures Act 

(ch. 227, Wis. Stats., Administrative Procedure and Review) in conducting and completing 

adoption/issuance of the revision?

Yes__X__

No______

Additional Explanation (if necessary)

11. Did the State include evidence that Public Notice was given of the revision, including date of publication?

Yes__X__

No ____

Additional Explanation (if necessary)

12. Did the State provide a copy of the certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the 

information provided in the public notice (copy of notarized Class I paper proof).

Yes_X__

No___

Additional Explanation (if necessary).

13. Does the submittal contain a compilation of public comments and the State’s response?

Yes__X__

No____

Additional Explanation (if necessary).

Technical Issues

14. Name the all the regulated pollutants affected by the revision? ___greenhouse gases________

15. Does the submittal identify the designation, status of the attainment plan and attainment date for the area(s)

Yes____

No_X____

Additional Explanation (if necessary)

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review program.

16. Does the submittal identify the location and types of affected sources?

Yes___X__
3

No_____

Additional Explanation (if necessary)

17. Does the submittal quantify the changes in SIP-allowable emissions and estimate or quantify the changes in 

actual emissions from affected sources?

Yes___

No__X__

Additional explanation (if necessary)

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program.

18. Has the State demonstrated that the NAAQS/PSD Increment/RFP demonstration/visibility will be protected 

if the revision is approved and implemented?

Yes____

No__X__

Additional explanation (if necessary).

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program for 

greenhouse gases.

19. Has the State provided modeling information to support the revision.

Yes___

No____

Unnecessary__X__

20. Has the State provided evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction 

technology?

Yes____

No_X___

Additional explanation (if necessary).

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program.

21. Has the State provided evidence that the revision contains emission limitations, work practice standards and 

record keeping/reporting requirements where necessary, to ensure emission levels?

Yes___

No__X__

Additional explanation (if necessary).

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program.

22. Does the submittal contain enforcement/compliance strategies including how compliance will be determined 

in practice, and at what frequency?

Yes___
4

No_X__

Additional explanation (if necessary).

Not applicable, submittal is for a new state statute affecting new source review permit program.
5

STATE APPROVABILITY CHECKLISTENFORCEABILITY

USEPA USE ONLY

SIP Package Number ___________

Date Received by USEPA ________________

Date Due_____________________________

State: WISCONSIN
6

WDNR Information

Subject Matter:

Revision to its current new source review State Implementation Plan (SIP) regarding the creation of sections 

285.60(3m) and 285.63(3m), Wis. State Statute. These statutes were created to allow WDNR to utilize the federal 

deferral for CO2 emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic sources under the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration permitting program.

Applicability

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

What sources are being regulated? Clear discussion Major sources under PSD program.

What are criteria for exemption? Clear discussion Not applicable

Is calculation procedure for 

exemption clearly specified?

Supply example calculation or clear explanation 

of how to determine exemption (line by line, 

etc.)

Not applicable

Is emission inventory listed in the 

background document of the 

attainment demonstration?

Inventory including allowable and actual 

emissions in source category should be included, 

for enforcement purposes and independent of 

any Clean Air Act requirements, in the 

attainment demonstration if such data is 

necessary for determining baselines in 

regulations.

Not applicable

Is the averaging time(s) used in 

the rule different from that of the 

ambient standard?

The averaging time in the rule must be consistent 

with protecting the ambient standard in question. 

Normally, it should be equal to or shorter than 

the time associated with the standard. Longer 

term averaging is available only in limited 

instances provided that the ambient standard is 

not compromised.

Not applicable

What are the units of compliance 

(lbs VOC per gallon of solids 

applied less water, grains per 

standard cubic foot?)

Clearly stated in the rule. Not applicable

Is bubbling or averaging of any 

type allowed? If yes, state 

criteria. Could a USEPA 

inspector independently determine 

if the criteria were met?? Does 

USEPA have to approve each 

case?

Explicit description of how averaging, bubbling, 

or equivalency is to be determined. VOC 

equivalency must be on a “solids applied” basis. 

Any method must be independently 

reproducible. Provision must be explicit as to 

whether USEPA case-by-case approval is 

required. If provision intended to be “generic” 

then USEPA bubble policy must be met.

No bubbling or averaging allowed. 

Yes, a USEPA inspector could 

independently determine if criteria 

was met. Statute submitted is 

identical to federal law.

If there is a redesignation, will this 

change the emission limitations? 

If yes, which ones and how?

Regulation may not automatically allow for self 

nullification upon redesignation of area to 

attainment. New maintenance demonstration 

required to order to drop regulation.

Not applicable
7

Compliance Dates

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

What is the compliance date? The compliance date must not be later 

than the approved or about to be 

approved date of attainment unless 

emission reductions are not necessary 

for attainment. In some cases, it will 

be necessary for the regulation to 

specify dates in compliance schedules 

that are required to be submitted by 

source to state.

Not applicable

What is the attainment date? Clearly defined. Not applicable

Specificity of conduct

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

What test method is required? Test method must be explicitly stated. Not applicable

What is the averaging time in the 

compliance test method?

Averaging time and application of 

limit must be explicit.

Not applicable

Is a compliance calculation or 

evaluation required? (i.e., daily 

weighted average for VOC).

Clearly defined. Not applicable

If a compliance calculation is 

necessary, list the formula, period of 

compliance, and/or evaluation 

method.

Formula must be explicit. Not applicable

Incorporation by reference

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

What is the state authority for 

rulemaking.

Clearly stated. 2011 Wisconsin Act 171 

Are methods/rules incorporated by 

reference in the right manner?

Clearly stated. Not applicable

Record keeping

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

What records are required to 

determine compliance?

Clearly stated. Not applicable

In what form or units (lbs/gal, gr/dscf, 

etc.) must the records be kept? On 

what time basis (instantaneously, 

hourly daily)?

Records to be kept must be consistent 

with units of compliance in the 

performance requirements, including 

the applicable time period .

Not applicable

Does the rule affirmatively require the 

records be kept?

There must be clearly defined and 

distinguishable from what constitutes 

a violation.

Not applicable
8

Exemptions

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

List any exemptions allowed. Must be clearly defined and 

distinguishable from what constitutes 

a violation.

Not applicable

Is the criteria for application clear? Clearly stated. Not applicable

Malfunction Provisions

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response

Are there any malfunction provisions 

in the rule?

Rule must specify what exceedances 

may be excused, how the standard is 

to be applied, and who makes the 

determination.

Not applicable



Date of enactment: April 2, 2012

2011 Assembly Bill 467 Date of publication*: April 16, 2012

2011 WISCONSIN ACT 171

AN ACT to create 285.60 (3m) and 285.63 (3m) of the statutes; relating to: consideration of certain greenhouse gas

emissions in determining requirements applicable to a stationary source of air pollution.

The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in

senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. 285.60 (3m) of the statutes is created to

read:

285.60 (3m) CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Unless required under the federal

clean air act, in determining whether a person is required

to obtain a construction permit or an operation permit for

a stationary source under this section based on emissions

of greenhouse gases resulting from the combustion or

decomposition of nonfossilized and biodegradable

organic material originating from plants, animals, or

microorganisms, the department may only consider carbon dioxide emissions consistent with 40 CFR 51.166 (b)

(48) and the definition of “subject to regulation” in 40

CFR 70.2.

SECTION 2. 285.63 (3m) of the statutes is created to

read:

285.63 (3m) CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Unless required under the federal

clean air act, in determining whether a major source is

subject to best available control technology under sub.

(3) (a) for greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the

combustion or decomposition of nonfossilized and biodegradable organic material originating from plants, animals, or microorganisms, the department may only consider carbon dioxide emissions consistent with 40 CFR

51.166 (b) (48) and the definition of “subject to regulation” in 40 CFR 70.2.

* Section 991.11, WISCONSIN STATUTES 2009−10 : Effective date of acts. “Every act and every portion of an act enacted by the legislature over

the governor’s partial veto which does not expressly prescribe the time when it takes effect shall take effect on the day after its date of publication

as designated” by the secretary of state [the date of publication may not be more than 10 working days after the date of enactment].






Stewart, Andrew M - DNR 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Hello Andrew, 

Welch, Robert C- DNR 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 4:03PM 

Stewart, Andrew M - DNR; Holtan, Paul R - DNR 

Stach, Sheralynn S - DNR 

RE: Notice of Public Hearing 

Here is the AIRS log information showing that Paul posted an update to http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/news/hearmeet.html on May 10. 

The log does not provide additional details on what content was posted only that the file was successfully deployed to the Production web server on this date and 

time. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. 

~ 'R. (!kzu. 'i!Jddt 

DNR Web Manager 

Office of Communications 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

('lir) phone: (608) 266-9671 

( <)e-mail: robert.welch@wisconsin.gov 

website: http://dnr.wi.gov/ 

newsroom: http://dnr.wi.gov/news/ 

flickr: flickr.com/people/widnr/ 

twitter: http://www.twitter.com/WDNR 

facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WIDNR 

youtube: http://www.youtube.com/WIDNRTV 

1 
From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Stewart, Andrew M - DNR 

Thursday, June 14, 2012 03:07PM 

Welch, Robert C- DNR; Holtan, Paul R- DNR 

Stach, Sheralynn S - DNR 

RE: Notice of Public Hearing 

According to Act 167 discussions, we can post hearing notices to the web and receive proof of publication from the person who posted it. Since this is after the 

fact and I need proof of publication for the attached notice I would respectfully request Chris search the web posting log to provide the date and time of posting. 

«File: GHG_Hearing_Notice.pdf » 

This is a time sensitive matter that impacts an air program submittal to US EPA and our customers applying for major source air permits. The sooner that I can 

receive the proof of publication the sooner that we will be able to implement the provisions of the new law. 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. In the future we will ask for this proof of publication in advance. Please feel free to contact me or Sheri Stach if you 

have questions on this matter. 

J,A~ ?it. Steeuatzt 

Chief. Permits & Stationary Source Modeling 

Bureau of Air Management 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

(iii) phone: (608) 266-6876 

('iii') fax: (608) 267-0560 

(>::)e-mail: andrew.stewart@wisconsin.gov 

Website: dnr.wi.gov 

DNR Newsroom: dnr.wi.gov/news/room 

Find us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/WIDNR 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Thank you. 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Stewart, Andrew M- DNR 

Thursday, May 10, 2012 01:33 PM 

Holtan, Paul R - DNR 

RE: Notice of Public Hearing 

Holtan, Paul R- DNR 

Thursday, May 10, 2012 12:45 PM 

Stewart, Andrew M - DNR 

RE: Notice of Public Hearing 

No, I'm just a little behind in posting and a whole bunch of hearings have come in. I will try to get through them this afternoon.- Paul 

2 
Paul Holtan 

DNR News & Outdoor Report Editor 

(608) 267-7517 

From: Stewart, Andrew M- DNR 

Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 12:28 PM 

To: Holtan, Paul R - DNR 

Subject: FW: Notice of Public Hearing 

Paul, 

Sent this notice on Tuesday and do not see it on the website. Would you be able to check to see if there are any problems? 

Thanks for your assistance. 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Stewart, Andrew M- DNR 

Tuesday, May 08, 2012 02:58 PM 

DNR CAL Hearing Meeting Calendar 

Sponseller, Bart A - DNR; Eckdale, Robert B - DNR 

Notice of Public Hearing 

The following hearing can be posted on the calendar for public hearings: 

«File: SIP _Notice_GHG_biogenic (2).doc » «File: GHG_Hearing_Notice.pdf » 

Please contact me if you have questions. 

t/;/'1~ ?lt. Ste«tMt 

Chief, Permits & Stationary Source Modeling 

Bureau of Air Management 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

(~)phone: (608) 266-6876 

('il)fax: (608) 267-0560 

c:··) e-mail: andrew.stewart@wisconsin.gov 

Website: dnr.wi.gov 

DNR Newsroom: dnr.wi.gov/news/room 

3 

State of Wisconsin CORRESPONDENCE/MEMORANDUM

DATE: June 20, 2012 FILE REF: 

TO: Files – SIP Submittal for Greenhouse Gas related to Act 171, Wis. State Statute

FROM: Andrew Stewart-AM/7

SUBJECT: Department of Natural Resources Response to Public Comments on Notice to Revise 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Wisconsin’s Major New Source Review Permitting Program as it 

Relates to Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

On May 12, 2012, the Department of Natural Resources gave 30 day notice of opportunity for the public 

to submit comments on its intention to revise the SIP and scheduled a public hearing for June 14, 2012.

No persons attended the public hearing on June 14, 2012.

No written comments were received by the department as of the end of the public comment period on 

June 15, 2012.