TO: 

FROM: 

DATE: 

RE: 

Dave Heineman 

Gouernor 

MEMORANDUM 

Governor Dave Heineman 

Michael J. Linder, Director 

4' l/Vvv--J.Xj A 1-1 ~OAugust 7, 2006 

STATE OF NEBRASKA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Michael J. Linder 

Director 

Suite 400, The Atrium 

1200 'N' Street 

P.O. Box 98922 

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509·8922 

Phone (402) 471·2186 

FAX (402) 471·2909 

website: www.deq.state.ne.us 

Request for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Nebraska Title 129 

Attached for review and approval are revisions and additions to Title 129 - Nebraska Air Quality 

Regulations. The Environmental Quality Council (EQC) approved these regulations on June 9, 

2006, following a public hearing, held the same day, in North Platte, Nebraska. The Attorney 

General has also approved them. The items in the Final Agency Checklist are also attached. 

Additional information is provided below in narrative form pursuant to Executive Order 95-6. 

A. SHORT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an 

explanation of amendments to Title 129 that were adopted by the EQC on June 9,2006. 

The amendments (a) revise Chapter 6 references to appendices; (b) clarify requirements 

for construction permit application fee in Chapter 17; (c) update references for New 

Source Performance Standards (NSPS) Subparts Db and Dc in Chapter 18; (d) update 

references to the federal Code of Regulations to reflect current versions of the rules for 

MACT standards, adopt by reference the MACT standard for ethylene manufacturing 

process units: heat exchange systems and waste operations, and extend the compliance 

deadline for sources subject to the MACTstandard for miscellaneous organic chemical 

manufacturing in Chapter 28; and (e) de-list methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) from the list of 

hazardous air pollutants in Appendix II and Appendix III, and completely reformat 

Appendix II and Appendix III. 

B. RATIONALE FOR ADOPTION: On December 19, 2005, the Environmental 

Protection Agency removed MEK from its list of regulated hazardous air pollutants. 

NDEQ has revised Appendix II and Appendix III to reflect this change. At the same time, 

the information in these appendices has been reformatted. There has been some 

confusion regarding the statutorily imposed fee for construction permit applications, the 

rules for which appear in Chapter 17. Therefore, a clarification has been adopted stating 

that any construction permit application requires a fee, regardless of whether the source 

An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 

@ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper ~ 
ultimately requires a permit. Recent changes to NSPS standards for celiain industrialcommercial-institutional steam generation units have been adopted. The CFR references 

for MACT standards have been updated to reflect the standards as of July 1, 2005 and the 

MACT standard in 40 CFR 63 Subpart XX has been adopted. Finally, the Federal 

Register reference in 40 CFR 63 Subpart FFFF has been adopted which allows an 18-

month extension ofthe compliance deadline for sources subject to this standard. 

C. GENERAL IMPACT: The changes adopted by the EQC in June 2006 either clarify 

existing rules or bring state rules into conformity with federal rules, so the impact is 

minimal. The reformatting of Appendix II and Appendix III will hopefully provide a 

more useful reference for users of Title' 129. 

D. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HEARING: Air Quality Division Program Specialist 

Beverly Kellison presented the Department's detailed proposals for changes to Title 129. 

No other oral testimony was presented. A request for clarification of a rule change in 

Chapter 6 from Rechelle Holloway of Tyson Foods was entered as written testimony. 

Following the hearing, the Envirorunental Quality Council adopted all proposed rules. 

E. EFFORTS TO ADDRESS ISSUES OF GROUPS OR INDIVIDUALS WHO 

HAVE COMMENTED: The changes proposed in June 2006 were generally routine and 

non-controversial in nature, so no stakeholder process beyond the required public notice 

was undertaken. The questions from Tyson Foods mentioned above were the only 

comments received. 

F. FISCAL IMPACT: The changes in Chapters 6, 17, and 28 will have no fiscal impact on 

NDEQ, local subdivisions, or the regulated public. There is potentially a fiscal impact on 

regulated sources from the changes to sections 001.22, and 001.52 in Chapter 18. It 

could be anywhere from zero where a source is in compliance and doesn't need to do 

anything different, to millions where a source isn't in compliance and needs to retrofit to 

meet the standard. However, a source will be subject to these changes in federal rules 

even ifNDEQ does not adopt them. The source would be subject to enforcement action 

by EPA instead of by NDEQ. 

There potentially could be a fiscal impact on NDEQ from the deli sting ofMEK in 

Appendix II and Appendix III. Since MEK will no longer be a regulated hazardous air 

pollutant, it would not be subject to construction permit requirements in Title 129, 

Chapter 17 and would not trigger the HAP BACT requirements in Chapter 27. The 

savings to NDEQ could be in the range of$l,OOO to $10,000 per source emitting MEK, 

depending on whether the source would have needed a permit before and now will not. 

For most regulated sources, the decision to de-list MEK will have no fiscal impact 

because MEK is still listed as a volatile organic compound, making the source still 

subject to emissions inventory reporting and fees. IfMEK emissions would formerly 

have caused a source to fall under construction permit requirements, delisting it could 

provide a substantial savings to the source. 
G. FTE IMPACT: The proposed revisions will have no impact on the number of full-time 

equivalent positions in the Department. 

H. UNFUNDED MANDATE: The proposed changes do not include any unfunded 

mandates on municipalities. 

I. ISSUES OF UNIQUE INTEREST: No proposed revision is of unique interest to a 

particular geographic area. 

I request and recommend that you sign the attached proposed revisions to Nebraska Department 

of Environmental Quality Title 129 - Nebraska Air Quality Regulations. Please contact Annette 

Kovar, Beverly Kellison, or me, if you have any questions or concerns. 

Checklist: (To be completed by Governor's Policy Research Office) 

30 day notice of he aringl waiver 

Affidavit of Publication 

Copy of Notice to Secretary of State and Executive Board of Legislative Council 

Agency Director's Certificate of Adoption 

Four Copies of Proposal and One Working Copy 

Attorney General Stamp of Approval on First and Last Pages 

Concise Explanatory Statement (including any description of changes) 

FinalFiscal Impact Statement (including any description of changes) 

Negotiated Rulemaking Notice, if applicable 

Regulations on diskette (or filed electronically) 

Memorandum to the Governor with Checklist and Information 
TO: 

Dave H~ineman 

GoVernor 

MEMORANDUM 

Governor Dave Heineman 

STATE OF NEBRASKA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVlRONf.{ENfAL QUAUlY 

Michael J. Linder 

Director· 

Suite 400, The Atrium 

1200 eN' Street 

P.O. Box 98922 

. Lincoln, Nebraska 68509·8922 

Phone (402) 471-2186 

. FAX (402) 471-2909 

website: www.deq.state.ne.us 

FROM: Mike Linder, Director ~. 

DATE: September 26, 2007 

RE: Request for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska 

Air Quality Regulations 

Attached for your review and approval are revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska Air 

Quality Regulations. The Environmental Quality Council on August 17, 2007, following 

a public heating held on August 17, 2007 in Lincoln, Nebraska, approved these 

regulations. The Attorney General has approved the proposed r~visions. The items 

identified in the Final Agency Checklist are also attached. Additional information is 

provided below in narrative form pursuant to Executive Order 95-6. 

A. Short Description - A short description of the major and substantive provisions of 

the revised regulations. 

Changes originally adopted by the EQC in September 2006 but rej ected by the 

Attorney General were re-proposed and adopted by the EQC on August 17, 2007. 

The adopted changes (a) revised Chapter 1 to respond to comments received from 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules and corrected typographical errors; (b) 

revised Chapter 14 to clarify language in response to EP A's request; ( c) revised 

Chapter 15 to respond to comments from EPA and clarify language describing a 

source's obligation when a facility's equipment configuration is changed but the 

change does not result iIi increased emissions; (d) r€vised Chapter 17 to correct 

language, to clarify the policy requiring sources to pay a construction permit 

application fee when requesting a significant revision to a construction permit, 

and to allow the construction permitting process to be used to establish Best 

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) permits; (e) revised Chapter 19 to correct 

PSD rules adopted in September 2005 and eliminate the option· for early 

tennihation of a Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL); (f) corrected 

references in Chapter 27; (g) revised Chapter 34 to clarify NDEQ's authority to 

1 

An Equal OpportunitlV'Affirmatiue Action Employer 

@ Printed ·with soy ink on recycled paper ~ 
TO: 

Dave Heineman 

Governor 

MEMORANDUM 

Governor Dave Heineman 

STATE OF NEBRASKA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Michael J. Linder 

Oil'ector 

Suite 400, The Atrium 

1200 'N' Street 

P.O. Box 98922 

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-8922 

Phone (402) 471-2186 

FAX (402) 471-2909 

website: www.deq.state.ne.us 

FROM: Mike Linder, Director 

DATE: 

RE: Request for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska 

Air Quality Regulations 

Attached for your review and approval are revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska Air 

Quality Regulations. The Environmental Quality Council on December 7, 2007, 

following a public hearing held on December 7,2007 in Lincoln, Nebraska, approved 

these regulations. The Attorney General has approved the proposed revisions. The items 

identified in the Final Agency Checklist are also attached. Additional information is 

provided below in nalTative fonn pursuant to Executive Order 95-6. 

A. Short Description - A ShOli description of the major and substantive provisions of 

the revised regulations. 

The adopted changes are all in section 003.02 of "Chapter 5-0perating PennitsWhen Required." They clarify the process for issuing operating pennits to major 

sources comprised of different regulated entities or "persons", as defined in 

Chapter 1. Chapter 1 defines "person" as any individual partnership; limited 

liability company; association; public or private corporation; trustee; receiver; 

assignee; agent; municipality or other governmental subdivision; public agency; 

other legal entity; or any officer or governing or managing body of any public or 

private corporation, municipality, governmental subdivision, public agency, or 

other legal entity. 

The current language of section 003.02 has only two options for permitting such 

sources: (1) obtain one permit for the entire source; or (2) obtain a general pennit 

for those emission units able to be covered by a general permit and obtain an 

individual permit for the remaining emissions units. If a general permit is not 

available, then there is only one option. The revised language would allow each 

"person" (regulated entity) to apply for its own pennit and allow the Department 

An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 

@ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper ~ 

I. 
to issue permits in that manner. In addition, the language is worded such that 

sources permitted in this manner will not avoid other major source obligations. 

B. Rationale for Adoption - A description of the need for the proposed chapter or 

amendment, and a description of the effects it will have if promulgated. 

The changes to Chapter 5 clarify the process for issuing operating permits to 

major sources comprised of different regulated entities or "persons". 

The Class I operating permit program requires major sources of air pollution to 

obtain operating pennits. The requirements for controlling hazardous air 

pollutants (HAPs) are different than those for other air pollution control programs. 

Under the federal HAP program, sources that are adjacent to one another and are 

under common control must aggregate their HAP emissions for applicability 

purposes, regardless of whether their operations are similar, that is, whether they 

fit within the same two-digit Standard Industrial Code. These adjacent operations 

are cunently required to be permitted under one single operating permit. This 

practice allows for stringent control of HAPs at each HAP emission unit, but it 

creates certain problems for the Department, such as 

• 

• 

• 

• 

To which regulated entity (person) does the Department issue the pennit? 

If the pennit is issued to one entity (person) and another one has a violation, 

how does the Department take enforcement action? 

Who does the Depmiment designate as the responsible official? 

What happens when controlling interest is sold to another partner or if the 

original ownership anangement changes? 

In addition, the cunent rules create difficulties for the sources pennitted in this 

manner. For example, 

• 

• 

• 

Only one responsible official can certify compliance with a permit, so the 

CUlTent regulations could potentially require someone to certify compliance 

for a source over which he or she has little, if any, control. 

The pennitted entity would have to make sure that all other businesses with 

which it has pminerships have the infonnation needed to comply with the 

pelmit. 

Businesses are often sold or other pminerships are fonned. If the ownership 

arrangement changes, further complications and confusion as to how to divide 

up responsibilities under the pelmit result. 

2 
C. General Impact - A description of the classes of persons who may be affected by 

the proposed chapter, and how they may be affected. This should be included 

even if the affected persons did not appear at the hearing. 

Persons affected by these changes are owners/ operators of major sources 

comprised of different regulated entities or "persons". 

D. Public Hearing (who testified, position and major comments) 

Beverly Kellison and Shelley Kaderly, both from the Air Quality Division 

provided informational testimony on the proposed revisions. No others testified. 

E. Efforts to address issues of groups or individuals who have commented: Are the 

comments incorporated into the final regulations? If yes, which issues? If not, 

why not? Include results of negotiated rulemaking if applicable. 

No groups or individuals commented on these changes. 

F. Fiscal Impact - None 

G. FTE Impact - None 

H. Unfunded Mandates - None 

1. Issues of Unique Interest - None 

Please do not hesitate to contact our agency Legal Counselor me, if you have any 

questions or concerns. 

3 
Checklist: (To be completed by Govemor's Policy Research Office) 

30 day notice of hearing/waiver 

Affidavit of Publication 

Copy of Notice to Secretary of State and Executive Board of Legislative Council 

Agency Director's Certificate of Adoption 

Four Copies of Proposal and One Working Copy 

Attorney General Stamp of Approval on First and Last Pages 

Concise Explanatory Statement (including any description of changes) 

Final Fiscal Impact Statement (including any descliption of changes) 

Negotiated Rulemaking Notice, if applicable 

Regulations on Diskette (or filed electronically) 

Memorandum to the Goven10r with Checklist and Information 

4 
TO: 

Dave Heineman 

Governor 

MEMORANDUM 

Governor Dave Heineman 

STATE OF N EBRASKA 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY 

Michael J. Linder 

Director 

Suite 400, The Atrium 

1200 'N' Street 

P.O. Box 98922 

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509·8922 

Phone (402) 471-2186 

FAX (402) 471-2909 

website: www.deq.state.ne.us 

FROM: Mike Linder, Director ~ ~ 

DATE: August 7, 2008 

RE: Request for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska 

Air Quality Regulations 

Attached for your review and approval are revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska Air 

Quality Regulations. The Environmental Quality Council on July 1, 2008, following a 

public hearing held on July 1, 2008 in South Sioux City, Nebraska, approved these 

regulations. The Attorney General has approved the proposed revisions. The items 

identified in the Final Agency Checklist are also attached. Additional information is 

provided below in nanative fonn pursuant to Executive Order 95-6. 

A. ShOli Description - A short description of the major and substantive provisions of 

the revised regulations. 

The changes will (a) repeal the annual National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) for PMIO which was revoked by EPA in December 2006, and adopt the 

new NAAQS for PM2.

5 which was issued by EPA in December 2006; (b) repeal 

rules related to regulation of mercury emissions from electric utilities; (c) repeal 

rules related to the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard 

for boilers; (d) repeal other vacated MACT standards; (e) repeal the "CISWI 

Definitions Rule" of the New Source PerfOlmance Standard (NSPS) for 

Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) units; (f) repeal 

other vacated New Source Perforn1anceStandards; (g) update New Source 

Perfonnance Standards; (h) update the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

reference for MACT standards; and (i) adopt recently issued MACT standards. 

1 

An Equal Opportu nitl¥'AjjirmatiueAction Employer 

@ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper ~ 
B. Rationale for Adoption - A description of the need for the proposed chapter or 

amendment, and a description of the effects it will have if promulgated. 

In December 2006, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoked the 

annual National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PMlO. At the same 

time, EPA issued a new, lower NAAQS for PM2.S. The standard was lowered 

from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter 24 hour average. We propose to 

remove the obsolete standard for PMlO and adopt the new standard for PM2.S to be 

consistent with federal standards. 

On February 8, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit vacated the federal Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR).l Rules 

adopted by the EQC in August 2007 essentially adopted CAMR by reference. For 

that reason, we now propose to repeal the rules adopted in August 2007 relating to 

control of mercury emissions. New rules issued by the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate mercury emissions are likely 

to be very different from the vacated rules. Given the direct incorporation by 

reference of the now vacated CAMR rule, it is also unlikely that NDEQ could 

practically implement these Title 129 rules as adopted in August 2007. 

On June 8, 2007, the same court vacated the MACT standard for certain boilers 

and the "CISWI Definitions Rule" ofthe New Source Performance Standard for 

Commercial and Industrial Solid Waster Incinerators (CISWI).2 Therefore, the 

MACT standard for boilers is proposed for repeal. We propose to adopt the 

CISWI rule as it was issued in 2000 prior to the issuance ofthe CIS WI 

Definitions Rule in 2005. On March 13,2007, the D.C. Circuit Court vacated the 

MACT standards for Plywood ad Composite Wood Products Surface Coating, for 

Brick and Structural Clay Products, and for Clay Ceramic Products. These are 

also proposed for repeal. Finally, we propose to adopt by reference several 

recently issued MACT standards and update the reference for other previously 

adopted MACT standards to July 1, 2007 to remain cuuent with the federal rules. 

A list of the changes incorporated by the CFR update is attached to this 

memorandum. 

C. General Impact - A description of the classes of persons who may be affected by 

the proposed chapter, and how they may be affected. This should be included 

even if the affected persons did not appear at the hearing. 

The impact of the several repeals of rules is to make the state rules in Title 129 

consistent with federal rules so there is not confusion between the federal and 

state requirements. The impact of adopting the new PM2.S standard is to bring 

state rules into compliance with the new federal standard which is more stringent 

that the cuuent standard in Title 129. A state air quality rule may be more 

) New Jersey v. B.PA, F.3d, 2008 WL 341338 CAD.C., 2008. 

2 Natural Resources Defense Council v. E.PA, 489 FJd, 1250 CAD.C. 2007. 

2 
stringent than a federal rule, but may not be less stringent. The impact of updating 

the NSPS rules in Chapter 18 is, again, to bring state rules into compliance with 

current federal rules. The impact of adopting MACT standards in Chapter 28 is 

that Nebraska DEQ assumes authority to enforce compliance with these standards 

should subject sources become operational in Nebraska. 

D. Public Hearing (who testified, position and major comments) 

At the public hearing on July 1, 2008, Beverly Kellison from the NDEQ Air 

Quality Division provided informational testimony on the proposed revisions. A 

letter from Joshua Tapp of the EPA Region 7 Air Planning and Development 

Branch was entered as testimony which suggested that the EQC consider retaining 

the annual PMIO standard that EPA revoked in December 2006. The NDEQ 

responded with EPA's own explanation published in the Federal Register as to 

why the annual PMIO standard was no longer needed. The Federal Register 

explanation stated that "the current 24-hour PMIO standard is 'controlling' ... that 

is, virtually all areas that violate the PMIO standards violate the 24 hour PMIO 

standard. Some of them may violate the annual PMIO standard as well, but few, if 

any areas violate the annual standard without violating the 24 hour standard." 

The EQC adopted the repeal of the annual PMIO standard from Title 129 as 

NDEQ had proposed. There were no other testimony provided at the hearing. 

E. Efforts to address issues of groups or individuals who have commented: Are the 

comments incorporated into the final regulations? If yes, which issues? If not, 

why not? Include results of negotiated rulemaking if applicable. 

No groups or individuals commented on these changes other than the comment 

from EPA noted in section D. 

F. Fiscal Impact - None 

G. FTE Impact - None 

H. Unfunded Mandates - None 

1. Issues of Unique Interest - None 

Please do not hesitate to contact our agency Legal Counselor me, if you have any 

questions or concems. 

3 
Checklist: (To be completed by Govemor's Policy Research Otlice) 

_ _ 30 day notice ofhearinglwaiver 

Affidavit of Publication 

Copy of Notice to Secretary of State and Executive Board of Legislative Council 

Agency Director's Certificate of Adoption 

Four Copies of Proposal and One Working Copy 

Attorney General Stamp of Approval on First and Last Pages 

Concise Explanatory Statement (including any description of changes) 

Final Fiscal Impact Statement (including any description of changes) 

Negotiated Rulemaking Notice, if applicable 

Regulations on Diskette (or filed .electronically) 

Memorandum to the Governor with Checklist and Information 

4 
STATE OF NEBRASKA 

Dave Heineman 

Governor 

MEMORANDUM 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Michael J. Linder 

Director 

Suite 400, The Atrium 

1200 'N' Street 

P.O. Box 98922 

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-8922 

Phone (402) 471-2186 

FAX (402) 471-2909 

website: www.deq.state.ne.us 

TO: 

FROM: 

DATE: 

RE: 

Governor Dave Heineman 

Mike Linder, Directo~JL-, 

April 28, 2010 

Request for Approval of Proposed Revisions to Title 129 -Nebraska 

Air Quality Regulations 

Attached for your review and approval are revisions to Title 129 - Nebraska Air Quality 

Regulations. Following a public hearing held on December 4,2009 in Lincoln, Nebraska, 

the Environmental Quality Council (EQC) approved these regulations. The Attorney 

General has also approved the proposed changes. The items identified in the Final 

Agency Checklist are attached. Additional information is provided below in narrative 

form pursuant to Executive Order 95-6. 

A. Short Description - A short description of the major and substantive provisions of 

the revised regulations. 

The changes adopted by the EQC at its December 2009 meeting included (a) changes 

to definitions in Chapter 1 and to rules in Chapters 22 and 30 to encourage the use of 

air curtain incinerators over open burning; (b) changes to Chapter 18 to align Title 

129 rules with the operating permit for a Douglas County landfill; and ( c) updates to 

the definition of volatile organic compounds in Chapter 1, including the delisting of 

dimethyl carbonate 

At the December 4 meeting, the EQC adopted a Department amendment withdrawing 

the proposed incorporation of five federal New Source Performance Standards in 

Chapter 18. The EQC also declined to approve proposed changes to Chapter 34, 

based on objections presented during the public hearing. All other proposed changes 

were adopted. The changes as adopted by the EQC are being are being submitted to 

you for review and approval. 

B. Rationale for Adoption - A description ofthe need for the proposed chapter or 

amendment, and a description of the effects it will have if promulgated. 

An Equa l Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 

@ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper ~ 

----
Using air curtain incinerators to combust clean waste results in the emission of far 

few pollutants than open burning. However, the rules relating to the use of these 

incinerators need to be expanded and clarified in order to encourage their use. We 

proposed to do this by including the definition of "air curtain incinerator" in Chapter 

1, and by specifying rules in Chapter 22 (Incinerators) and in Chapter 30 (Open 

Burning). 

In renewing the operating permit for the State Street landfill operated by Douglas 

County, it was found that its design is not currently accounted for in Title 129 rules. 

We proposed to correct this situation by incorporating rules into Title 129, in the 

111 (d) plan for municipal solid waste landfills, to allow for the alternate design plan 

for this landfill which has been in operation for a number of years. The rules, as 

adopted, currently will apply only to this facility. 

The definition of "volatile organic compound" in Chapter 1 includes a listing of 

compounds which have been determined to have "negligible photochemical 

reactivity". These compounds are considered exempt from the rules governing the use 

of volatile organic compounds. Several compounds have been added to this list by 

EP A, including dimethyl carbonate. We proposed to align our definition with EPA's. 

C. General Impact - A description of the classes of persons who may be affected by 

the proposed chapter, and how they may be affected. This should be included 

even if the affected persons did not appear at the hearing. 

The impact of adopting the changes related to air curtain incinerators will encourage 

the use of these incinerators over traditional open burning. This will be a positive 

impact on the environment. 

The change related to the Douglas County State Street landfill will not have impact 

on any classes of persons. It will simply make Title 129 consistent with what is 

already allowed for in the landfill's operating permit. 

The exemption of dimethyl carbonate from the list of volatile organic compounds will 

allow for expansion of its use. A manufacturer of this product describes it as an 

odorless, fast-evaporation solvent, useful in acrylics, urethane and alkyd systems as a 

co-solvent. 

D. Public Hearing (who testified, position and major comments) 

At the public hearing on December 4,2009, Beverly Kellison from the NDEQ Air 

Quality Division provided informational testimony on the proposed revisions. 

Testimony was also presented by Matt Boerkircher of Nebraska Ethanol Safety and 

Environmental Council; Loran Schmit of Association of Nebraska Ethanol Producers, 

2 
Bernie Hoffman of Trenton Agri Products LLC and Don Gansert of Trinity 

Consultants. These four testifiers expressed concern about the changes proposed for 

scheduling stack testing. As a result, the Council declined to adopt the proposed 

changes to Chapter 34. 

E. Efforts to address issues of groups or individuals who have commented: Are the 

comments incorporated into the final regulations? If yes, which issues? If not, 

why not? Include results of negotiated rulemaking if applicable. 

As noted above, the EQC did not adopt the proposed amendments related to stack 

testing. Subsequent to the December 4 hearing, staff from the NDEQ Air Quality 

Compliance Section have met with representatives of the ethanol industry in an effort 

to come to agreement on stack testing scheduling concerns. NDEQ may propose 

changes to Chapter 34 in coming months. 

F. Fiscal Impact - None 

G. FTE Impact - None 

H. Unfunded Mandates - None 

I. Issues of Unique Interest - None 

Please do not hesitate to contact our agency Legal Counselor me, if you have any 

questions or concerns. 

Checklist: (To be completed by Govemor's Policy Research Office) 

30 day notice ofhearinglwaiver 

Affidavit of Publication 

Copy of Notice to Secretary of State and Executive Board of Legislative Council 

Agency Director's Certificate of Adoption 

Four Copies of Proposal and One Working Copy 

Attorney General Stamp of Approval on First and Last Pages 

Concise Explanatory Statement (including any description of changes) 

Final Fiscal Impact Statement (including any description of changes) 

Negotiated Rulemaking Notice, if applicable 

Regulations on Diskette (or filed electronically) 

Memorandum to the Governor with Checklist and Information 

3