### State of Wisconsin
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 101 S

. Webster Street Box 7921 Madison WI 53707-7921



### Jun e 20,2012

George T. Czerni a k, Acting Dir ec tor Air and Radiation Divi s ion U.S. Environmental Pr otec tion Agency Regi o n V 77 West Jackson B o ul eva rd Chicago IL 60604-3507 Scott Walker

, Governor Cathy Stepp, Secretary

Telephone 608-266-2621 Toll Free 1-888-936-7463 TTY Access via r elay- 71 1



### Subject: Revisions to Wiscon s in' s New Source Review State Implement at i o n Plan

Dear Mr. Czerniak :

The Wiscon sin D e p a rtment ofNatural Resources ( WDNR ) hereby s ubmits a revision to its c un ·ent ne w source review State Impl e m e ntation Plan (SIP) for sec tions 285 .6 0(3m) a nd 285.63(3m), Wis. State Statute as published and effective on April 16,2012. Th ese s tatut es were created t o allow WDNR t o utili ze the federal def e rral fo r C0 2 

### emissions fro:n bi oe n e rgy a nd other biogenic so urce s under the Preven t i o n of Sig nifi ca nt Deteri o r a ti on permitting program.

With this lett er we a r e s ubmittin g the state s tatute a nd s upp or tin g documentation as a formal SIP revi s i on. WDNR

r e qu es ts EPA process thi s SIP submittal as soo n as po ssib le so that permitted so ur ces benefit from the r e li ef
pr ovi ded in the EPA rule fo r the remainin g time th e def e rr a l i s in effec t.

If you should h ave a ny que s tion s r ega rdin g this s ubmitt a l

, ple ase ca ll Andrew Stewart of my s taf f at 608 266- 6876 o r e mail him a t a ndrew. s tewart @w isco n s in .gov

. Sincerely, 

# 0 r4

-

Batt Spo n se ller

, Dir ecto r Bureau of Air M a na ge m en t

Attachments: A- G HG

_ SIP

_ biogenic_checklist.doc B- GHG

_ SIP

_ bi oge nic_ certificat i on.p d f C

- GHG _SIP

_ bi ogenic_signed

_ h ear in g

_ n o ti c e_pdf D

- Wi s _A c t

_ l 7 1.pd f E- Wis_state ...:. s t at ut e

_ 285 _60 .pdf F

- Wi s _s t a t e

_ s t a tut e_ 285

_ 63 .pdf G- GHG_SIP

_ bi ogenic_w ebp age.doc H

- RE: Notice of Public Hearing.msg I

- GHG

_ S IP

_ biogenic

_ publi c

_ comme n t

_ memo.doc

cc : Andrew Stewatt-AM/7 (e

- co py) Ralph P a tter son-AM/7 (e-copy)

dnr.wi.gov wisconsin.gov 

## Naturally 

# WISCONSIN 

# 0 PRINTEO ONR EC Y ctEO 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 subm ittal. 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___ Tele phone __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 method s/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 evide nce 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 complet ing 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 wit h the information provided in the public notice (copy of notarized Class I paper proof).

Yes_ X

__ No___ Additional Explanation (if ne cessary).

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? ___ gre enhouse 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 affe cting 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 reduc tion 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 limitat ions, 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 CHECKLIST

ENFORCEABILITY

USEPA USE ONLY

SIP Package Number ___________ Date Received by USEPA ________________ Date Due_____________________________ State: WISCONSIN6



# 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 federa l deferral for CO 2 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 discussio n 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 crite ria. 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” basi s. 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 USEP A 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 applicable7



## Compliance Dates

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response What is the compliance date? The complian ce 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 re quired 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
Wha t 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 record s 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 compli ance 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 applicable8



## Exem ptions

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



## Mal function 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

201 1 Assembly Bill 467 Date of publication*: April 16, 2012 

# 2011 W ISCONSI N A C T 1 71

A N 

# A CT to create 285.60 (3m) and 285.63 (3m) of the statutes; r elating to: consideration of certain greenhouse gas emissions in determining requirements applicable to a stationary source of air pollution.

The people of the state of W isconsin, represented in
senate and assembly

, do enact as follows:

S ECTION 1. 285.60 (3m) of the statutes is created to read: 285.60 (3m) C ONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN GREEN

HOUSE 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 car

bon dioxide emissions consistent with 40 CFR 51.166 (b) (48) and the definition of “subject to regulation” in 40 CFR 70.2

. S ECTION 2. 285.63 (3m) of the statutes is created to read: 285.63 (3m) C ONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN GREEN

HOUSE 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 bio

degradable or

ganic material originating from plants, ani

mals, or microor ganisms, the department may only con

sider carbon dioxide emissions consistent with 40 CFR 51.166 (b) (48) and the definition of “subject to regula

tion” in 40 CFR 70.2

.

* Section 991.1 1, W ISCONSIN S TATUTES 2009−10 : Ef fective 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 ef fect shall take ef

fect 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

1From: 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

2Paul 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:::!!
:r Q.. c Ill 0 :r

# ~go ?':

## 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.