Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules 41283 

1 In the same document, NJDEP submitted rule 

revisions related to minor facilities fees found at 

N.J.A.C. 7:27–8 as a SIP submittal. This SIP 

submittal will be addressed in a separate 

rulemaking. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 70 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2015–0837; FRL–9948–31– 

Region 2] 

Clean Air Act Title V Operating Permit 

Program Revision; New Jersey 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the New Jersey title V 

Operating Permit Program requested by 

the New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection (NJDEP) on 

May 15, 2015. NJDEP adopted a rule 

revision on December 29, 2014, to 

change the fee schedule for certain 

permitting activities for major facilities, 

including application fees for significant 

modifications and fees to authorize 

general operating permit registration 

and operation of used oil space heaters. 

The adopted rule took effect on 

February 27, 2015. NJDEP submitted a 

request to EPA to incorporate the 

revised fee schedule into its Operating 

Permit Program. EPA proposes to 

approve the requested change as a 

revision to the NJOPP. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 25, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02– 

OAR–2015–0837, at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Suilin Chan, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4019. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

section provides additional information 

by addressing the following items: 

I. Background 

EPA granted full approval of the New 

Jersey title V Operating Permit Program 

on December 5, 2001 (66 FR 63168). The 

New Jersey Operating Permit Program 

(NJOPP) is implemented through its 

Operating Permits Rule codified at 

Subchapter 22 of Chapter 27 of Title 7 

of the New Jersey Administrative Code 

(N.J.A.C. 7:27–22). As mandated by title 

V of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as well as 

its implementing regulations found in 

part 70 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (40 CFR part 70), an 

approved State must establish a fee 

schedule that results in the collection 

and retention of revenues sufficient to 

cover the direct and indirect costs of 

implementing the State’s operating 

permit program. NJDEP periodically 

adjusts the title V fee schedule 

stipulated at N.J.A.C. 7:27–22 to ensure 

that the NJOPP is adequately funded by 

fees collected from subject sources. 

EPA’s evaluation of New Jersey’s title V 

fee program during a program audit 

conducted in 2012 showed that the fees 

collected by New Jersey were 

insufficient to cover the costs of 

administering the NJOPP. The NJOPP 

has a deficit carried over year after year 

that accumulated to $7.5 million dollars 

as of fiscal year (FY) 2011. As of FY 

2014, the cumulative shortfall was over 

$10 million dollars. New Jersey is 

required to resolve the funding issue by 

taking all necessary actions. 

II. Summary of Program Revision 

On December 29, 2014, New Jersey 

finalized rule revisions to amend certain 

fee provisions for major facilities in its 

Operating Permits Rule, codified at 

N.J.A.C. 7:27–22. For significant 

modifications, NJDEP charges major 

facilities base fees for straightforward 

applications and adds supplementary 

fees for more complex applications. The 

prior fee schedules for significant 

modifications were found at N.J.A.C. 

7:27–22.31(r), (s), (v) and (w). These 

provisions expired on December 29, 

2014 and have now been deleted. New 

Jersey’s revision replaces these 

provisions with a new Base Fee 

Schedule and Supplementary Fee 

Schedule for significant modifications, 

found at N.J.A.C 7:27–22.31(y) and 

N.J.A.C 7:27–22.31(z) respectively. 

New Jersey’s revision also updated 

the fee schedule for a major facility’s 

registration under a General Operating 

Permit and authorization to operate a 

used oil space heater. The prior fee 

schedule for these actions was located at 

N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.31(t) and (x) and 

expired on December 29, 2014. New 

Jersey’s revision deletes those 

provisions and replaces them with a 

new fee schedule at N.J.A.C. 7:27– 

22.31(aa). 

Finally, New Jersey’s revision updates 

other provisions of the Operating 

Permits Rule to reflect references to the 

new fee schedules rather than the prior 

now-deleted provisions, including at 

N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.1 (definition of 

‘‘probe’’) and N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.31(a)(6), 

(e), (k)(1), (k)(2), (p) and (u)(4), (5), (7), 

and (9). For details of New Jersey’s 

revision of its Operating Permits Rule, 

please refer to the public docket. 

New Jersey has found that these 

increases in fees are necessary to 

provide additional funding to help 

reduce the deficit for the NJOPP, and 

the rule changes effectuating the 

increases have undergone the State’s 

complete rulemaking process. On May 

15, 2015, NJDEP submitted a request 

that these revisions to its Operating 

Permits Rule be incorporated into New 

Jersey’s Operating Permit Program as a 

program revision, in accordance with 40 

CFR 70.4(i).1 This proposed rule would 

grant that request. 

III. Proposed Action 

The State of New Jersey has adopted 

rule revisions to increase the base and 

supplementary fees for significant 

modifications at major facilities, at 

N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.31(y) and (z), and 

registration fees for major facilities’ use 

of General Operating Permits and 

authorization to operate used oil space 

heaters at N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.31(aa). The 

rule revisions also deleted outdated fee 

provisions at 7:27–22.31(r)–(t) and (v)– 

(x) and updated cross-references found 

in N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.1 (definition of 

‘‘probe’’) and N.J.A.C. 7:27–22.31(a)(6), 

(e), (k)(1), (k)(2), (p) and (u)(4), (5), (7), 

and (9). The rule revisions were adopted 

in accordance with the state’s 

rulemaking procedures on December 29, 

2014. The rule changes are necessary to 

increase fee revenues to fund the 

NJOPP. The requirement that revenues 

collected from sources subject to a 

state’s Operating Permits Program 

provide funding sufficient to cover the 

permit program’s costs is mandated by 


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41284 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

title V of the CAA and its implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR 70.9. In today’s 

action, pursuant to 40 CFR 70.4(i)(2), 

EPA is proposing to approve NJDEP’s 

May 15, 2015 request to incorporate 

New Jersey’s Operating Permits Rule 

(N.J.A.C. 7:27–22) as revised on 

December 29, 2014 as a revision to New 

Jersey’s Operating Permit Program. EPA 

is soliciting public comments on EPA’s 

proposed action to incorporate the 

revised rule into the NJOPP. These 

comments will be considered before 

taking final action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

This proposed action merely proposes 

to approve State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). It also does not provide EPA 

with the discretionary authority to 

address, as appropriate, 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects, using practicable 

and legally permissible methods, under 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994). 

Because this rule proposes to approve 

pre-existing requirements under State 

law and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by State law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

This action also does not have 

federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

National Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Act. 

This proposed rule also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272 

note, requires Federal agencies to use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus to 

carry out policy objectives, so long as 

such standards are not inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise 

impracticable. In reviewing State 

Operating Permit Programs submitted 

pursuant to title V of the Clean Air Act, 

EPA will approve such regulations 

provided that they meet the 

requirements of the CAA and EPA’s 

regulations codified at 40 CFR part 70. 

In this context, in the absence of a prior 

existing requirement for the State to use 

voluntary consensus standards (VCS), 

EPA has no authority to disapprove 

such regulations for failure to use VCS. 

It would, thus, be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, when it reviews 

such regulations, to use VCS in place of 

a State regulation that otherwise 

satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air 

Act. Thus, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the NTTAA do not apply. 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Operating permits, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: June 14, 2016. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2016–15004 Filed 6–23–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 271 and 272 

[EPA–R08–RCRA–2016–0174; FRL–9947– 

05–Region 8] 

Wyoming: Proposed Authorization of 

State Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions and Incorporation 

by Reference 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to grant 

authorization to the State of Wyoming 

for the changes to its hazardous waste 

program under the Solid Waste Disposal 

Act, as amended, commonly referred to 

as the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has 

determined that these changes satisfy all 

requirements needed to qualify for final 

authorization, and is authorizing the 

state’s changes through a direct final 

action. In addition, the EPA is 

proposing to codify in the regulations 

entitled ‘‘Approved State Hazardous 

Waste Management Programs,’’ 

Wyoming’s authorized hazardous waste 

program. The EPA will incorporate by 

reference into the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) those provisions of 

the State regulations that are authorized 

and that the EPA will enforce under 

RCRA. 

DATES: Send written comments by July 

25, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

RCRA–2016–0174 by mail to Christina 

Cosentini, Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Program, EPA Region 8, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Mail Code 8P–R, 

Denver, Colorado 80202. You may also 

submit comments electronically or 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 

rule located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christina Cosentini at (303) 312–6231, 

cosentini.christina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

Federal Register, the EPA is authorizing 

changes to the Wyoming program, in 

addition to codifying and incorporating 

by reference the State’s hazardous waste 

program as a direct final rule. The EPA 

did not make a proposal prior to the 

direct final rule because we believe 

these actions are not controversial and 

do not expect comments that oppose 


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS