ALLIANCE
Technologies Corporation
-------
SUMMARY OF STATE AND LOCAL
OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
REVISED FINAL REPORT
Prepared for:
Roger Powell
Noncriteria Pollutant Programs Branch (MD-15)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
and
State/Local Subgroup
Operating Permits Work Group
Prepared by:
Alliance Technologies, Inc.
6320 Quadrangle Drive
Suite 100
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
June 1992
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF TABLES v
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.1.1 Methodology 2
1.1.2 Level of Response 3
1.1.3 Report Organization 4
1.2 Executive Summary 5
1.2.1 State Operating Permit Programs 5
1.2.2 Local Agency Operating Permit Programs 14
2.0 SCOPE OF STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS 19
2.1 Pollutants Covered 19
2.2 Sources Covered 19
; 2.3 Multiple Emission Points 20
2.4 Nontraditional Sources 20
3.0 ELEMENTS OF STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS 23
3.1 Permit Renewal Cycles 23
3.2 Application Form 27
3.3 Permitting Fees 27
3.4 Reporting Requirements 30
3.5 Reopen for Cause 30
3.6 Notice, Public Hearing, Public Comment Requirements 31
3.7 Permit Review Procedure 32
3.8 Permit Issuance 34
4.0 POTENTIAL IMPACT OF TITLE V 35
4.1 Types of EPA Assistance Needed 35
4.2 Adequacy of Rules and Legislation 35
5.0 SCOPE OF LOCAL OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS 38
5.1 Pollutants Covered 38
5.2 Sources Covered 38
5.3 Multiple Emission Points 39
5.4 Nontraditional Analyzed Sources 39
CH-92-34 11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
6.0 ELEMENTS OF LOCAL AGENCY OPERATING PERMITS PROGRAMS 42
6.1 Permit Renewal Cycles 42
6.2 Application Form 45
6.3 Permitting Fees 45
6.4 Reporting Requirements 47
6.5 Reopen for Cause 48
6.6 Notice, Public Hearing, Public Comment Requirements 49
6.7 Permit Review Procedure 50
6.8 Permit Issuance 50
7.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF TITLE V 53
7.1 Types of EPA Assistance Needed 53
7.2 Adequacy of Rules and Legislation 54
Appendix A Questionnake A-l
Appendix B Summary of State Responses . . . B-l
Appendix C Summary of Local Agency Responses from Agencies with Independent
Programs C-l
CH-92-34 111
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Status of State Operating Permit Programs 7
2 Percent of Major U.S. Sources Represented in Each of the Operating Permit
Categories 9
3 Potential Problem States Ranked by Number of Major Sources 12
CH-92-34 IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Breakdown of States into the Major Operating Permit Categories and Selected
Requirements of Title V 8
2 Breakdown of Local Agencies that Implement District Programs into the Major
Operating Permit Categories and Selected Requirements of Title V 15
3 Breakdown of Local Agencies that Implement their Respective State Programs into
the Major Operating Permit Categories and Selected Requirements of Title V 16
4 Types of Sources Exempted from the Operating Permit Requirements; State
Programs 21
5 Operating Permit Renewal Cycle Periods; State Programs 25
6 Frequency of Applicability Questions; State Programs 33
7 States Assessment to Adequacy of Rules and Regulations 37
8 Types of Sources Exempted from the Operating Permit Requirements; Local Agency
Programs 40
9 Operating Permit Renewal Cycle Periods; Local Agency Programs 44
10 Frequency of Applicability Questions; Local Agency Programs 51
11 Local Agencies Assessment to Adequacy of Rules and Regulations 55
CH-92-34
-------
NOTICE
Some information contained in this document pertaining to the current status of State and
local air pollution control agencies operating permits programs may not be current since the data
related to State/local agencies operating permits programs was compiled between September 1990
and April 1992. Since enactment of Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments in
November, 1990, some State/local agencies may have already enacted legislation to implement
some of the operating permit program elements required by Title V.
CH-92-34 VI
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction
Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) provides for the establishment of
an operating permits program by State and local air pollution control agencies. Title V requires
EPA to promulgate regulations, within one year of enactment, that set forth the requirements for
State permit programs, submission of which is required within three years of enactment.
Permitting provisions will primarily affect State agencies but any local agencies that have
permitting authority are also affected by the provisions of Title V. The operating permit program
applies to pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act (CAA) emitted from all major sources
and any other sources subject to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), and from other sources as may be
added.
These permits are considered Federally enforceable, address applicable requirements of the
Act, and contain emission limits, compliance plans, reporting requirements, and other measures
to ensure their effective implementation. Permits are subject to public comment before issuance,
including EPA opportunity to veto certain permits. A required element of the program is that
States are required to assess fees to sources being permitted. Such fees must be sufficient to fund
the portion of the air quality program pertaining to permits.
Most States have an operating permit program in place now. Implementation of the Title
V requirements will likely require some changes in several existing programs, and the extent of
the changes will depend on how closely a State's current provisions match the Title V
requirements. In an effort to minimize any undue disruption to existing programs and to
understand current permitting programs and the potential impact of Title V, the State and
Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution
Control Officials (STAPPA/ALAPCO) surveyed all State and local agencies with respect to the
status of their current operating permit programs.
CH-92-34
-------
The objective of this report is to summarize the status of existing State and local agency
operating permit programs. This information is needed to establish a baseline from which the
Title V program will be developed. This survey information has helped EPA to design
regulations which build upon the existing programs and minimize disruption to these programs.
1.1.1 Methodology
A questionnaire on operating permit programs was sent to all State and local agencies by
STAPPA/ALAPCO. It was based, in part, on proposed legislative changes for Title V available
in early 1990. The survey was divided into 13 sections. These sections were:
1) agency information,
2) background regarding agency operating permit program,
3) applicability of operating permit program,
4) operating permit issuance,
5) permit modification,
6) permit renewal,
7) agency work load requirements,
8) fees,
9) enabling legislation,
10) a general section on current agency status regarding implementing Title V
requirements,
11) agency recommendations for EPA considerations in designing and
implementing the Title V permit program,
12) additional information for local control agencies about their current operating
permit programs, and
13) potential impacts of pending legislation.
CH-92-34
-------
A copy of the questionnaire is included in Appendix A. For consistency in the results, the
survey used various terms related to sources of air pollutants and these terms along with their
definitions are presented below:
A. Major and Minor Sources
1. Major Source - any source that emits more than 100 tons per year (TPY) of
any pollutant after control and under reasonable operation assumptions.' For
purposes of this analysis, there are estimated to be approximately 9100 major
sources nationwide.
2. Minor Source - any source that emits less than 100 TPY of any pollutant after
control.
B. Terms Specific To Major and Minor Sources
1. Al Source - any source that emits more than 100 TPY of any pollutant after
control.
2. A2 Source - any source that emits from 25 TPY through 100 TPY of any
pollutant after control.
3. B Source - any source that emits 25 TPY or less of any pollutant after control.
1.1.2 Level of Response
Forty-three State air pollution agencies and 62 local air pollution control agencies
responded to the survey by September 11, 1990. Two additional States responded by mid-
February, 1991. In addition to States which responded with written surveys, the EPA solicited
telephone responses from five additional States. One of these five States submitted a complete
survey in October 1991. It should be noted that the survey results contained in this report reflect
responses to only selected sections of the survey by one State (Maine) which was contacted by
telephone. Responses from all 50 States are summarized in Appendix B.
Some State and local agencies responded to certain questions based only on their
construction permit programs, and several local agencies provided responses based on their
CH-92-34
-------
respective State operating permit programs rather than a distinct local program. Neither of these
types of responses was counted in the summary of the results.
Based on the responses, some questions were apparently not focused enough to be useful.
For example, the questions regarding public notice/public hearing and public comment were
misconstrued by some State and local (S/L) agencies as being applicable to either an operating
or a construction permit program. This was especially true in cases where S/L agencies have a
program in which a construction permit would automatically become an operating permit
immediately after source start-up. In these cases, public notice/public comment/public hearing
was usually conducted during the pre-construction phase. This report discounts such responses,
where they were clearly marked, so that the results presented reflect only operating permit
program requirements. In addition, other misinterpretations of various survey questions by S/L
agencies may have occurred. As such, the bias associated with such misinterpretations are not
reflected in this report.
Sixty-two local agencies provided responses to the survey. Most of these agencies
implemented an operating permit program, but only the responses from 26 agencies which
indicated that they had their own distinct operating permit program (i.e., those agencies which
permit sources in their respective jurisdictions using local ordinances and which are not just an
extension of the State agency's program) were analyzed for the purposes of this report
1.1.3 Report Organization
This report is organized in seven sections. Section 1.0 provides an introduction and
executive summary on the current status of the S/L agencies with regard to the Title V
requirements. Section 2.0 discusses the scope of the States' operating permit programs. Section
3.0 discusses the various elements of State operating permit programs. Section 4.0 discusses the
potential impact of Title V requirements on States' current operating permit programs. Sections
5.0 to 7.0 correspond to Sections 2.0 to 4.0 but pertain to local agencies. Appendix A contains
a blank survey form and Appendices B and C contain summaries of State and local responses,
respectively.
CH-92-34 4
-------
1.2 Executive Summary
1.2.1 State Operating Permit Programs
All 50 States responded to the survey. Forty-six of the 50 States responded to the entire
survey. An additional four States (California, Iowa, Maine, and New Mexico) submitted
responses to a select number of survey questions through telephone correspondence with EPA.
West Virginia also responded to a select number of survey questions through telephone
correspondence and responded to the entire survey by October 1991. Of these 50 States, 38
States have operating permit programs and 12 States do not. Three of these twelve States,
(Montana, Utah, and Virginia), are in the process of developing such a program.
Throughout this report, States have been categorized according to the type of operating
permit program in place. The following three categories represent the basic requirements of Title
V, and, to some extent, reflect the impact Title V will have on State and local agencies. For
example, some States may not have the enabling legislation to promulgate regulations requiring
the renewal of operating permits no greater than every 5 years.
Category 1
a - operating permits are issued to new and modified sources only and there is no
permit renewal
b - operating permits are issued to new and modified sources only and these
permits must be renewed
Category 2
a - operating permits are issued to existing sources as well as new and modified
sources and there is no permit renewal
b - operating permits are issued to existing sources as well as new and modified
sources and permits must be renewed
Category 3
no operating permit program
CH-92-34 5
-------
Category 1 includes agencies that permit only new and modified sources. Since Title V
requires that existing sources have operating permits, agencies in category 1 will have to change
their permitting program accordingly. Category 2 includes agencies that permit existing sources
as well as new and modified sources. Since these agencies already have provisions for permitting
existing sources, the changes necessitated by Title V will not be as great for category 1.
Categories 1 and 2 are subdivided to reflect which agencies have permit renewal requirements.
Title V requires that operating permits be renewed on a regular fixed basis, not to exceed 5 years.
Agencies currently without renewal requirements for operating permits will have to add this
requirement to their programs. Finally, category 3 includes agencies that have no operating
permit program and who will have to build a program under the Title V requirements.
Figure 1 indicates which States correspond with each category. All 50 States responded.
States that are in category 2b - renewable operating permits issued to new and existing
sources - more closely encompass the basic intent of Title V compared to other States.
Table 1 indicates the States contained in categories 1 and 2 and where the States stand
with regard to selected elements of an operating permit program that are required under Section
502(b) of the CAAA. Figure 2 summarizes the percentage of major sources represented by the
various operating permit program categories. Data on the number of major sources in the State
were available for all States except Alaska and Hawaii.
The following results summarize the information presented in Figure 1, Table 1 and Figure
2:
1. Four State programs issue operating permits to new and modified sources only
with no permit renewal period. These four States represent 7.9 percent of the
major U.S. sources. These States include Colorado, Michigan, Oklahoma, and
Wyoming.
2. Six State programs issue operating permits to new and modified sources only
and these permits must be renewed. Five of these States (there is no major
source statistics for Hawaii) represent 9.6 percent of the major U.S. sources.
CH-92-34
-------
FIGURE 1 Status of State Operating Permit Programs
No Program
New Sources Only - No Permit Renewal
New & Existing Sources - No Permit Renewal
New Sources Only - Permit Renewal
New & Existing Sources - Permit Renewal
-------
Table 1 1 lby&&$ฎm o^S&tes Jofcs the Major Operating ?e3iปltsC^tegtaies w& Sde*^5BjE5q(Jtซmeปts^of "
: A- v '-. " "' "330$ V^*wjtf{r&n$RtS ' . -"^ ^ ,';-, ' ^ , /"Vv^" I
State
: ^'
Colorado
Michigan
Oklahoma
Wyoming
;
Arizona
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
New Jersey
Texas
Standard
Application
Form
'. f ."".
X
X
X
X
^ s ^ ''
X
X
X
X
X
X
Collect/ Retain
Fees
Fixed Renewal
Cycle (5 Years
or Less)
JfewjModtfirf Sbarcw . tfo fen
X/X
X/X
' Kew^fodtEM
XI
XI
XI
XIX
XI
Snq**ฃagiซ]fei
X
X
X
X
X
Monitoring and
Reporting
Requirements
X
X
X
X
wwalRe,
X
X
X
X
X
X
Reopen for
Cause
Public Hearing
Public
Comment
->" - \ /o^Tr^"^
X
X
X
X
- "- " " V --
X
X
X
X
X
X
^-v-s;^ -
X
X
X
1 ' - ^^JpJte^wM^iitos^^ --- " ;V\^r5
Alabama
Arkansas
Georgia
Kentucky
Nebraska
X
X
X
X
X
XI
X/X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
i , - " ^-" UxiWg $ซ* J&w&fodS&l $owx?e? * ?tm&T&M'#&'8tqxfa4 ' ' ^r "*, .-^
Alaska
Florida
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota
Mississippi
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
West Virginia
Wisconsin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x\
XN
x\
XN
XNX
XN
XNX
XN
XN
XNX
XN
XN
XNX
XN
XNX
XN
XNX
XNX
XNX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
Figure 2: Percent of Major U.S. Sources* Represented
in Each of the Operating Permit Categories
1b
1a
1a. New / Modified Sources - No Permit Renewal
1 b New / Modified Sources - Permit Renewal
2a. Existing & New / Modified Sources - No Permit Renewal
2b. Existing & New / Modified Sources - Permit Renewal
3. States which do not have Operating Permit Programs
* This figure is based on available records on the largest sources of
any regulated pollutants (i.e., greater than 100 TPY actual
emissions).
-------
These States include Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, New Jersey, and
Texas.
3. Five State programs issue operating permits to existing as well as new and
modified sources with no permit renewal period. These five States represent
8.1 percent of the major U.S. sources. These States include Alabama,
Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, and Nebraska.
4. Twenty-three State programs issue operating programs to existing as well as
new and modified sources which require permit renewal. Twenty-two of these
States (there is no major source data for Alaska) represent 53.2 percent of the
major U.S. sources. These 23 States include Alaska, Florida, Illinois, Indiana,
Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New
Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia and
Wisconsin.
5. Twelve States do not have an operating permit program. These States are
California, Idaho, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico,
Virginia, Vermont, Rhode Island, Utah, and Washington. These States
represent 21.1 percent of the major U.S. sources. Montana, Utah and Virginia
noted that they are currently developing operating permit programs.
State survey responses were also reviewed to determine how well their operating permit
programs might meet the requirements of Title V, presented in Section 502 (b) of the CAAA.
These requirements are:
use of an operating permit application form
collection of permit fees
monitoring and reporting requirements
ability to reopen operating permits for cause
public hearing/public comment requirements
Results of the survey can be used to identify States that have most of the Title V requirements
in place. Similarly, by looking at the number of States that appear not to meet the basic intent
or requirements of Title V, EPA can get some idea of how the new legislation might impact State
operating permit programs and the sources they cover.
CH-92-34 10
-------
Table 1 lists the program category for each State and indicates some of the major Title V
requirements currently in place. These relationships are summarized below:
All 38 States which currently have operating permit programs use a standard
application form.
Twenty-eight of these 38 States collect operating permit fees and 27 of these
States (no major source statistics for Hawaii) represent 65.9 percent of the
major U.S. sources.
Thirty-seven of the 38 States have source data reporting and monitoring
requirements under their operating permit program.
Thirty-three of the 38 States can reopen an operating permit for cause.
Eight States require that public notice be given when an operating permit
application is received.
Eighteen States have public hearing/public comment requirements. Three of
the States stated that public hearing/public comment was not a requirement, so
the assumption was made that these States implement this program as an
administrative policy. These States are Georgia, New York, and North Dakota.
Nine States meet all the major Title V requirements highlighted in Table 1.
Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota,
Oregon, and South Carolina all regulate existing sources as well as new and
modified sources, renew permits within a fixed term of 5 years or less, use a
standard application form, collect fees, impose monitoring and reporting
requirements, can reopen a permit for cause, and have public hearing and
public comment requirements.
Twenty-six States might be considered potential problem States with regards to
implementing the Title V requirements. That is to say, these States do not currently implement
one of the following programs:
operating permit program
permit renewal program
regulate existing plus new/modified sources
collect permit fees
CH-92-34 11
-------
These 26 States are included in program categories 1, 2a and 3. Figure 3 ranks the potential
problem States by the number of major U. S. sources contained in each of these States.
Seven States have permit application default provisions which allow for the automatic
issuance or renewal of permits if the agency fails to act within a certain period of time. Such
provisions are not desirable because they could lead to the circumvention of Title V requirements.
For the 28 States analyzed that collect permit fees, 25 reported the types of State fund
where the fees go. This is broken down as follows:
10 States - general fund
5 States - environmental protection fund
10 States - air program
3 States - some other fund
It should be noted that several States reported that their fees go to multiple funds.
Survey Conclusions
The major conclusions drawn from the analysis of the 50 States which responded to this
survey are as follows:
1. Over half (53.2 percent) of the major U.S. sources are accustomed to renewable
operating permits for new/modified and existing sources based on the list of
approximately 9100 sources with actual emissions greater than 100 TPY.
2. Because 65.9 percent of major U.S. sources have been subject to operating
permit fees, the requirement of fees will be important at a State level for
several States, but a significant number of major sources will not be impacted
by this requirement.
3. One Title V requirement that seems to be often absent from most State
programs is the public notice/public hearing/public comment requirement.
Other potential problems include correction of default issuance policies, the
size of and obligation of the air agencies to retain fees sufficient to offset
CH-92-34 12
-------
Figure 3. Potential Problem States Ranked by Number of Major Sources*
600 -
550 -I
500 _
A CA
450
os 400 -I
5S 35ฐ ~:
ฃ! 3ฐฐ ~:
O -
4) 250
-2
C 9HD
-
-
n
1
1
1
1
1
-
1
1
i
,
8
3
* Based on actual emissions greater than 100 TPY
-------
reasonable costs of the program, and the absence or limited scope of some
State programs.
1.2.2 Local Agency Operating Permit Programs
As explained in Section 1.1.2, a. total of 26 local agencies were analyzed for inclusion into
this report. Responses from these local agencies are summarized in Appendix C. Of these 26
agencies, all have operating permit programs. As with the State agencies, the local agencies were
categorized according to the type of operating permit program in place. Table 2 lists the program
category for each agency, and where each local agency stands with regard to selected elements
of an operating permit program that is requked under Section 502(b) of the CAAA. Table 3
summarizes responses of the remaining local agencies that answered the survey questions but did
not indicate that they implement their own district operating permit program.
The information presented in Table 2 is summarized as follows:
1. One agency issues operating permits to new and modified sources only with no
permit renewal. This agency is Grant County, Washington.
2. One agency issues operating permits to new and modified sources only and
these permits must be renewed. This agency is Chattanooga-Hamilton County,
Tennessee.
3. Five agencies issue permits to existing and new and modified sources with no
permit renewal. These agencies are Huntsville, Alabama; Jefferson County,
Alabama; St. Louis County, Missouri; Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Wayne County,
Michigan.
4. Nineteen agencies issue permits to existing and new and modified sources with
a required permit renewal period. These agencies are Amador County,
California; Bay Area, California; South Coast Air Quality Management District
(California); Evansville, Indiana; Hammond, Indiana; Kings County, California;
Lake County, California; Memphis Shelby County, Tennessee; Monterey Bay,
California; Nashville, Tennessee; Northern Sonoma County, California;
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Sacramento, California; San Diego, California; St.
Louis, Missouri; Springfield, Oregon; Ventura County, California; Vigo
County, Indiana; and Washoe County, Nevada.
CH-92-34 14
-------
TABLES. %- BBฃAKflQWฃ0ฃJ*X^AGi^C|^
. ^ ^
: v -...
New/Modified Sources - No
Permit Renewal
New/Modified Sources - Permit
Renewal Required
Existing Plus New/Modified
Sources - No Permit Renewal
Existing Plus New/Modified
Sources - Permit Renewal
Required
- s " ^ ' '. .. "
. \ \ .. ....
Grant Qy, WA
Chattanooga-
Hamilton, Cty, TN
Huntsvffle, AL
Jeff. Cty, AL
St. Louis Cty, MO
Tulsa, OK
Wayne Cty, MI
Amador C, CA
Bay Area, CA
Evansville, IN
So. Coast, Air
Quality-Mgmt
District, CA
Hammond, IN
Kings Cty, CA
Lake Cty. CA
MemTShelby
Cty. TN
Mont. Bay, Ca
Nashville, TN
No. Sonoma Cty,
CA
Philadel., PA
Sacramento, CA
San Diego, CA
St Louis, MO
Springfield, OR
Ventura Cty, CA
Vigo Cty, IN
Washoe Cty, NV
Xv.". -" s J
\\;s
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
;,8et*la;
X/X
XK
XI
XK
XI
XI
XK
XI
XI
XI
XI
XI
XIX
XIX
x/x
XI
XK
XI
XIX
XK
XK
XK
X
XK
ijฃ
; ***H
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mof4foriitg
Mkl kซjp
-------
: i \ * ^ % - ; RESPECTIVE STATE PROGRAMS INTO THE MAJOR OPERATING FERNET ^ ; % %
%" C ATJSGOIUBS AND SSUBOTED' IGKQISJtB^IEI^IS OF T^TtE-'T s% ^s s' ^v^"'1**
^'- :'H : ;':'-: * ' "'* -AvSซii^:-$*- :. " -:;: - '1^:
Operating Permit
Category
:HMrtOrf|M\ ^
xSwtPW -.* w f&ttm
: Renewal ^ / ,
\tf&M*$lx* --
Sow? w * Jsflwt
:^ซw-^;f^jpH*! .. ',-'/
. ^
'."'' J '' "
* -. v ^ % "
% ^ t * '
*" \ ^
A
v ^ ^
: v
'. >: "" ^ *
^ ^
Local Agency
(None)
FJ Paso County, CO
Lincoln-Lancaster County, NE
Pinellas County, FL
Allegheny Cty, PA
Anchorage, AK
Cleveland, OH
Dayton, OH
Forsythe Cty, NC
Indianapolis, IN
Jacksonville, FL
Maricopa Cty, AZ
Mecklenburg Cty, NC
Metro-Dade Cty, FL
New York City, NY
Piraa Cty, AZ
Polk Cty, IA
Sarasota Cty, FL
Spokane Cty, WA
Toledo, OH
Western (AsheviUe), NC
YeUowstone Cty, MT
Standard
Application
Form
\ rf>
^
-^ - \
' v ^~-
,..,,.,,. ^.<:,
^ ^ ,
f ^ .
\ ^\
^' ^v.
L % X %%%s
:" " 3C '" "" *
: ^''V'' ""&'
^'X"'''''--1'
i% " - '" ; "-
: ' 5 ^ ^
i ' X * "
- X '' '
X '-
; " 'X " %,
%"ic "'
; * ^
: '
i r s
i x -
x/ ,
Collect/
Retain
Fees
X/X
x/
x/
x/
x/
x/
x/
X/X
x/
x/
x/
X/X
X/X
x/
x/
x/
X/X
Fixed
Renewal
Cycle (5
Years or
Less)
x ;
" s
' v% ' "
rr* "
%
^ % *
. v **
-> ' /
i X VX^"S "
^ sJS^1"1 S
1 x ^-"
\%x ^
s 'x%i- X f s
x /-
Jf . *s
3f x
^%' X *v
% x ^ \
,\^ ^\^
x^
^ ^^^
> X% ^
^ ,- -x ^
. %s% 1
Public
Hearing
Public
Comment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
-------
Section 12.1 delineated certain requirements of Title V, Section 502(b) of the CAAA.
Local agencies which currently appear to meet all or some of these requirements are listed in
Table 2. These relationships are summarized below:
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies use a standard application form. The
local agency in Nashville, Tennessee does not use a standard application form
but uses different application forms for various source categories. The agency
in St. Louis, Missouri does not use either a standard application form or
different application forms for various source categories.
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies collect operating permit fees. The
agencies in St. Louis, Missouri and Wayne County, Michigan do not currently
collect fees.
All 26 local agencies currently have reporting and monitoring requirements.
All 26 local agencies can reopen an operating permit for cause.
Twenty-two of these 26 local agencies have public hearing/public comment
requirements. Three local agencies stated that public hearing/public comment
: was not a requirement but provided other responses that suggest these agencies
implement this program as an administrative policy. These local agencies were
Bay Area, California, Memphis-Shelby, Tennessee, and Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. The agency located in Grant County Washington did not
respond to this survey question.
Of the twenty-six local agencies, eight local agencies might be considered potential problem
agencies with regard to implementing the Title V requirements. That is, these local agencies
currently do not implement one or more of the following:
permit renewal program
regulate existing plus new/modified sources
collect permit fees
Six of these local agencies (Grant County, Washington; Huntsville, Alabama; Jefferson County,
Alabama; St. Louis County, Missouri; Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Wayne County, Michigan;) do not
currently have a permit renewal program. One of the eight local agencies (Chattanooga-Hamilton
County, Tennessee) does not regulate both existing and new and modified sources. Additionally,
CH-92-34 17
-------
the local agencies in Wayne County, Michigan and St. Louis, Missouri currently do not collect
permit fees.
Seven of these 26 local agencies have permit application default provisions (two local
agencies did not provide responses). Application default provisions allow for the automatic
issuance or renewal of permits if the agency fails to act within a certain period of time. These
provisions are not desirable because they violate the intention of Title V.
Twenty-two of the 26 local agencies analyzed provided information with regards to the type
of municipal fund where the fees go. This is broken down as follows:
11 Local Agencies - general fund
1 Local Agency - environmental fund
12 Local Agencies - air program
It should be noted that the fees for two of these 26 local agencies go to multiple funds.
Survey Conclusions
The major conclusions drawn from the analysis of the 26 local agencies are as follows:
1. Three-fourths (75 percent) of the local agencies have renewable operating
permit programs for new/modified and existing sources.
2. Permit fee requirements were absent in only two of the 26 local agencies
surveyed and therefore it appears that this requirement may not have a
significant impact on local agencies in implementing the Title V requirements.
3. Since only three of the 26 local agencies surveyed did not have requirements
for public hearing/public comment, most local agencies which will be subject
to the Title V requirements will most likely not find this specific requirement
to be a major hurdle in implementing a program in accordance with the CAAA.
Some potential problems include correction of default issuance provisions and
the authority for the air agency to retain fees collected so they may be used to
offset the cost of the permitting program.
CH-92-34 18
-------
2.0 SCOPE OF STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
This section describes the scope of the State operating permit programs with regard to the
type of pollutants regulated as well as types of sources (e.g., NSPS, NESHAP, nontraditional
sources) subject to operating permits. Responses from 46 States that completed the entire survey
are summarized in this section. Section 2.1 describes the type of pollutants covered by State
programs, Section 2.2 describes the types of sources covered, Section 2.3 pertains to operating
permits which cover multiple emission points, and Section 2.4 describes the types of
nontraditional sources included in State operating permit programs.
2.1 Pollutants Covered
All States that have an operating permit program in place noted that criteria pollutants are
covered, and only three (Kansas, South Dakota, and Wyoming) do not regulate Section 112
(hazardous) pollutants. Twenty-five States cover toxic pollutants not covered by Section 112,
including 11 of the 18 States that issue renewable permits to new and existing sources.
2.2 Sources Covered
The survey questionnaire asked what sources were covered by the operating permit
program, giving a multiple choice breakdown by source size and regulatory applicability. Of the
38 States with operating permit programs in effect, 35 States noted that their operating permit
programs cover sources that emit more than 100 tons per year (TPY) of any pollutant, after
control. Kansas and Colorado do not currently permit sources that emit more than 100 TPY,
after control, and Maine did not respond to the survey question. Programs in 33 States cover
sources that emit 25 to 100 TPY. Thirty States cover sources that emit 25 or less TPY. Kansas
indicated that it regulates sources which emit greater that 10 TPY for TSP, CO, S02 and VOCs,
or greater than 50 TPY before control for NO2, lead and hazardous air pollutants. Thirty-five
States cover sources subject to New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Kansas and Indiana
do not currently permit sources subject to NSPS and Maine did not provide a response to the
CH-92-34 19
-------
survey question. Thirty-two States' operating permit programs cover sources subject to National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS).
Thirty-seven out of 38 States reported that some sources are exempted from their operating
permit program. Choices for basis of the exemption listed on the survey form were low size or
capacity, de minirnis emission level, or "other." Twelve States checked all three bases.
It should be noted that the 12 States which checked the "other" box were confused by this
question because responses to this box ranged from "types" of sources exempted to a clarification
of what constitutes low size or capacity and de minimis emissions levels. Responses were not
adjusted to reflect this misunderstanding. Table 4 lists the State responses to the specific source
exemptions presented in the survey.
2.3 Multiple Emission Points
Title V states that a single permit may be issued to a facility with multiple sources. Of the
37 State operating permit programs which responded to the entire survey, all but three States
(New Hampshire, New York, and Ohio) reported that their agency can cover multiple emission
points located within the same source under a single permit.
2.4 Nontraditional Sources
All but four (Alabama, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia) of the 37 States (with
operating permit programs) which responded to the entire survey cover at least one type of
nontraditional source. Specifically, eight States regulate landfills, nine cover publicly-owned
treatment works, five regulate compost, 31 cover sources typically covered by RCRA (e.g.,
hazardous waste incinerators, waste co-fired boilers and furnaces), and nine noted that they cover
some other nontraditional source. Some of these other sources include open burning; air
CH-92-34 20
-------
: Table 4. Types of Soaim B*fea W&m fbe Operating i?e3dttft^eซpiimซeat $. Slate l^ogjcaras c -
*\. */; ^m*&wMซ.&***m*Mw^% :*'y , V^% ^J
Woodstoves
Asbestos
Demolition
Renovations
Radionuclide
Sources
Residential
Boiler/Comfort
Furnaces
Air
Conditioning
Ventilation
Nonstatutory
Systems
ICE'
Other"
, NewModtfWScweซaOnfyป'Nttl<ซnpttปaiwHrf ,"',,".. , { ;-;-T ^ "
CO
MI
OK
WY
s
AZ
CT
DE
HI
NJ
TX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
New/Modiflett Sources* Permit ReiwwaJKeq
X
X
-
X
X
-
X
X
X
.
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
udrea ? " s
X
X
.
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
.
X
\ - , &teOftgHuSK^/M^iftMปmrttt,^P^ttซ*rt^4t - .. . - "..;..
AL
AR
GA
KY
NE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Erfstlซปg Mas JfewModJfied Soiircซs . Pennk Renewal Rซquire
-------
strippers, aeration basins, and lagoons; sewage sludge incinerators; and soil decontamination
processes.
CH-92-34 22
-------
3.0 ELEMENTS OF STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
This section provides specific information comparing States' operating permit programs to
selected Title V requirements. Section 3.1 describes the States status regarding operating permit
renewal periods and enabling legislation for implementing such programs. Section 32 describes
application forms used by the States along with application completeness criteria methods,
application completeness certification, and general permits which cover numerous similar sources.
Section 33 discusses States permitting fee programs. Section 3.4 describes States current
monitoring and reporting requirements. Section 35 provides information regarding States ability
to reopen operating permits for cause. Section 3.6 delineates the current requirements for public
notice/public hearing, and public comment during the review of permit applications. Section 3.7
describes permit renewal procedures used by the States. Finally, Section 3.8 discusses operating
permit issuance procedures used by State operating permit programs.
It should be noted that information on the numbers of regulated sources in the United States
used in the following sections are for major sources only. In addition, the information compiled
here represents responses from the 38 States which have operating permit programs. This section
frequently refers to the operating permit program categories listed in Section 1.0. These three
categories indicate where States stand with respect to the basic intent of Title V.
3.1 Permit Renewal Cycles
Of the 38 States which responded to the survey and which currently have operating permit
programs, 29 States issue permits which are renewed using a fixed or variable renewal cycle.
Nine States do not have permit renewal programs at the present time. Of the 29 States with
permit renewal programs, 20 States issue permits with a fixed renewal cycle and nine States issue
permits which are renewed using a variable renewal cycle.
CH-92-34 23
-------
Table 5 delineates the numbers of States by operating permit category with the respective
fixed or variable renewal cycle period.
In general, of the 20 States which issue permits with a fixed renewal period, only three
States renew operating permits annually, five States renew operating permits every three years,
one State renews permits every four years, nine States incorporate a five year renewal period,
only one State renews permits every 10 years, and only one State renews operating permits every
15 years. Of the nine States which incorporate a variable renewal period, two States renew
operating permits on a 1 - 3 year cycle, five States utilize a 1 - 5 year renewal cycle, only one
State incorporates a 3 - 5 year renewal cycle, and one State utilizes a 2 - 10 year renewal cycle.
Title V requires a fixed permit renewal cycle of not greater than 5 years. There were 26
States which had operating permit renewal cycles (either of fixed or variable length) of 5 years
or less. Five of these 26 States regulate only new and modified sources representing 3.8 percent
of all major U.S. sources based on available information from four of these States. The other
21 States regulate both existing and new and modified sources and based on available statistics
from 20 of these States this represents 46.2 percent of all major sources in the U.S. It should
be noted that one of these 21 States (Wisconsin) provides only a review of each source permit
at the end of the permit period and does not renew source permits. Since Wisconsin already has
enabling legislation in place to create a permit renewal program, it was included in this category.
States which do not already have enabling legislation to promulgate regulations allowing
for a fixed permit renewal program of not greater than 5 years will find it difficult to implement
this Title V requirement in a timely manner because establishing adequate statutory authority will
be time consuming.
Three States have renewal cycles (either of fixed or variable length) of greater than 5 years.
One of these States (Tennessee), however, has enabling legislation for implementing a 5-year or
less permit renewal program. Tennessee regulates both existing and new and modified sources
representing 3.3 percent of major U.S. sources. For the other two States (Louisiana and Texas)
CH-92-34 24
-------
taMe 5, Operat>ogBeaปltleปtewal Cycle &sjads; : Slate Bปgrs8ปs ' ; -.,- -^ v \4
: - < 'STA1B * '-
f .,. ', "
Alaska
Arizona
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Minnesota
Mississippi
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
West Virginia
Wisconsin
, ,.CAtTORY* < -i
2b
Ib
Ib
Ib
2b
Ib
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2B
2b
2b
Ib
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
Ib
2b
2b
'- 8ฃ&ฃWALmiQD, -;,-
-. sss s ^ % % ss
1-5 Years
3 Years
1 -5 Years
5 Years
1-5 Years
3-5 Years
1-3 Years
4 Years
Annually
10 Years
5 Years
Annually
5 Years
3 Years
5 Years
1 -3 Years
5 Years
5 Years
5 Years
3 Years
3 Years
5 Years
1 -5 Years
5 Years
3 Years
2 - 10 Years
15 Years
Annually
2-5 Years
! * ' ^OaJegory Ifc includes agencies that Jssee wmmfolU' operating permtte to ปeซr aปd existing sources only/
- ' Category 2ib include agi&BCi^ tte* fesue &*&#&&&. fjenhits m B&w, iMilified, iud 'fexfetiftg '"sottfteir^ ' \
25
-------
which do not have enabling legislation at this time, one of these States (Texas) regulates only
new and modified sources (5.8 percent of major U.S. sources) and the other State (Louisiana)
which regulates existing and new and modified sources represents 3.7 percent of the major
sources in the U.S.
There were nine States which do not have a permit renewal program and of these nine
States, only four States have enabling legislation in place for incorporating renewal cycles of 5
years or less. All four of these States (Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky and Nebraska) regulate
existing and new and modified sources and comprise 6.1 percent of all major U.S. sources. For
the remaining five States (Colorado, Georgia, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wyoming) four regulate
new and modified sources only comprising 7.9 percent of major sources and one State (Georgia)
regulates both existing and new and modified sources representing 2.0 percent of all major
sources.
The survey included several questions on the role of permit renewal. Eleven States said
that the revision of an existing operating permit initiates a new renewal period. Four additional
States said this was the case under certain circumstances.
Almost all the responding States (32) said that new requirements can be imposed. Twenty-
four States can impose new requirements when such requirements become applicable and seven
States impose new requirements only at permit renewal. Eight States impose new requirements
under other circumstances.
The survey asked whether renewal of operating permits could be used as an opportunity
to do several things. Responses are summarized below for the 29 States that require permit
renewal.
correct errors 27 States
incorporate new State requirements 24 States
incorporate new Federal requirements 21 States
codify voluntary source reductions 20 States
CH-92-34 26
-------
develop additional requirements 26 States
beyond State or Federal Requirements
(on a case-by-case basis)
3.2 Application Form
Title V requires that operating permit programs must use a standard application form and
establishes criteria for determining completeness of the application. All 38 States that have
operating permit programs use a standard application form, and 22 States have different
application forms for certain source categories.
The Title V requirements call for, "adequate, streamlined, and reasonable procedures for
expeditiously determining when applications are complete..." Twenty States are currently using
a checklist or policy that defines application completeness criteria.
Title V requires the accuracy of any report (including the permit application) to be certified
by a responsible corporate official. Of the 38 States that use a standard application form, 30
require that the permit application include a certification by a facility official that the application
is accurate.
Title V allows a State to issue a general permit covering numerous similar sources, however
each source would still have to file an application form. The survey asked States if they
currently have provisions for general permits covering similar sources without requiring
individual application forms. Eleven States have such provisions, including six in the group of
States that have permit renewal for existing as well as new sources.
3.3 Permitting Fees
Of the 38 States that have operating permit programs, 28 collect fees, and one State
(Delaware) is reviewing the possibility of fee collection. Of the 10 that do not collect fees, six
CH-92-34 27
-------
have enabling legislation that allows the State to assess permit fees adequate to cover all
permitting program costs.
Title V calls for an annual fee, or the equivalent over some other time period, sufficient to
cover all reasonable costs of developing and administering the operating permit program. To
address the current status of this requirement, the survey asked States what types of fees are
collected: permit application fees, annual operating fees, or other types of fees such as
construction, inspection, renewal, excess emissions, or technical assistance. Sixteen States
currently collect an annual operating fee, 19 collect permit application fees, and 14 collect some
other types of fees, including annual inspection fees, renewal fees, stack testing fees, and fees
for modeling. Several States (19) collect more than one type of fees.
Since Title V requires that annual permit fees cover all costs of the operating permit
program, the survey asked States to identify the current basis for fees. The choices listed in the
survey include: cost of program administration, emissions, production, flat fee, source category,
or some other basis such as size or complexity of source. Only six States currently base annual
operating fees on the cost of administering the permit program. The basis for permit fees are
summarized below:
Administrative costs 6 States
Emissions 7 States
Production 2 States
Hat fee 5 States
Source category 13 States
Title V requires that all fees collected total not less than $25 per ton per year of each
regulated pollutant or such other amount that the EPA Administrator determines to adequately
reflect the reasonable costs of the permit program. When asked if $25 per ton would be
sufficient to recover costs of developing and implementing the operating permit program, 31 of
the States with operating permit programs said that it would. Only one State (Maryland)
responded that it would not be sufficient. (Only 32 States responded to this question). These
CH-92-34 28
-------
responses should be evaluated with caution, however. In a related question, the survey asked if
States had ever conducted time and activity analyses to determine the actual costs incurred in
implementing operating permit programs. Eighteen States had conducted such analyses, but only
two States that had conducted analyses assessed fees based on the cost of administering the
program. Of these two States, one State (North Dakota) responded that the $25.00 per ton fee
would be sufficient to recover costs associated with developing and implementing an operating
permit program. The other State (Arizona) did not provide a response to that particular question.
According to the requirements of Title V, any permit fees collected by States must be used
solely to support the State's air pollution control permit program. Therefore, the survey queried
States as to the use of the fees currently collected. Choices included: the general revenue fund,
the environmental protection fund, the air program, or some other collection. Twelve States that
collect fees noted that the fees collected go to the air program. Fourteen States listed the general
revenue fund, and five States checked the environmental protection fund. Five States indicated
that fees go to a combination of the funds.
A number of States submitted fee schedules. While the schedules varied quite a bit there
were some types of fees in common:
annual operating permit fees. For one State (Maryland), these ranged from
$100 to $10,000, depending on the type of source. For another State (North
Carolina), these fees were based on administrative costs, including a monitoring
fee.
permit application processing fees. Some States utilize a flat fee, some were
based on emissions (e.g., Texas which ranged from $300 to $10,000), and one
(Colorado) was based on hourly charges for permit processing. Additionally,
one state (Kansas) charges an operating permit fee of $20.00 multiplied-by a
factor depending on the source category.
annual fee for inspection. Texas uses an annual inspection fee which accounts
for about 50 percent of the agency's budget.
CH-92-34 29
-------
3.4 Reporting Requirements
Another element of an operating permit program required under Title V is monitoring and
reporting requirements. Of the 38 States that have operating permit programs, 37 States currently
have monitoring and reporting requirements. The State of Kansas currently does not have these
requirements and the State of West Virginia limits monitoring and reporting requirements only
to new sources and some existing sources. The types of operation data tracked by these State
requirements include the following:
hours of operation 33 States
production units completed 29 States
materials used 32 States
fuel use 34 States
emissions estimates 29 States
CEMS data 33 States
stack test data 34 States
ambient monitoring data 25 States
other 12 States
Types of data included in the "other" category were control equipment down time, start-
up/malfunction records, preventative maintenance performed, and calibration performed. Several
States noted that recordkeeping and reporting requirements varied on a case-by-case basis.
Thirteen States noted that they keep reported data in computerized files. Six of these 13
reported that they could transfer computer files containing the data reported by the permittees to
EPA via modem, and a total of 16 States could forward computerized data to EPA via mail or
modem.
3.5 Reopen for Cause
According to Title V, permitting agencies must be able to, "terminate, modify, or revoke
and reissue permits for cause." Thirty-three States currently can reopen an operating permit for
CH-92-34 30
-------
cause. Two additional States (Arizona and Maryland) that do not reopen for cause have the
enabling legislation to do so. The survey form presented a variety of circumstances under which
an operating permit might be reopened. The following list summarizes the circumstances
indicated by the States:
Adoption of new State/local regulation 25 States
Adoption of new Federal regulation 20 States
Correction of a significant error 28 States
Clarification or correction of minor error 25 States
Reflection of name or ownership change 26 States
Noncompliance with permit conditions 4 States
With regard to the scope of review for permits reopened for cause, 19 of the 33 States that
can reopen an operating permit for cause, consider only the emission units directly affected. One
State considers all associated emission units, and 11 States consider the entire source when a
permit is reopened for cause. Finally, two additional States (Louisiana and Maine) did not
provide a response to the survey question.
3.6 Notice, Public Hearing, Public Comment Requirements
Title V requires that a State notify all contiguous States of each permit application and each
draft permit. Notified States must be able to submit written recommendations. In a related
requirement, Title V calls for any permit application, compliance plan, permit, or monitoring or
compliance report to be made available to the public.
Only one State (Delaware) currently notifies adjacent States. One additional State
(Arizona) noted that it notifies adjacent States only if those States would be adversely affected
by the emissions. Four States (Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, and Georgia) noted that they notify
the general public upon receipt of a permit application.
CH-92-34 31
-------
Eight States currently provide copies of the draft operating permit and related materials to
the public. Thirteen States have some type of public hearing/public comment requirements.
Eight of these are in the category that have permit renewal for new and existing sources.
3.7 Permit Review Procedure
The survey asked several questions concerning review of operating permit applications.
Title V stresses an expedient review, limiting comment periods for adjacent States, for example.
Twenty-two States responded that they have a time limit on the agency's review of a permit
application. States listed these time periods which were typically 30, 45, 60, 90, or 180 days.
In regard to the survey question on whether States have the authority to include permit
conditions that go beyond underlying SIP or other regulatory requirements, 28 States responded
that they have this authority. Of these 28, 27 States noted that this authority was used on a case-
by-case basis, as determined through the permitting process. None said it was done only in
response to a Federal request. Most often case-by-case determinations regarding requirements
not explicitly stated in the SIP or other regulations involve emission limits. Operating conditions
and reporting are also important areas for such determinations.
The survey asked States how often applicability questions arise during the permit review
process that call for an agency determination to clarify what regulatory provisions apply. States
were asked to indicate if this happens frequently (>25 percent of the time), occasionally (10 - 25
percent of the time), infrequently (1 - 10 percent of the time), or almost never (less than 1
percent). Responses varied among the four choices and are summarized in Table 6. Included
with the responses is the number of major sources in each State. It should be noted that one of
the 38 States which have operating permit programs (Maine) did not provide a response to this
question.
In response to the survey question on batch processing operations, 20 States reported that
they include special conditions in operating permits to accommodate batch processing operations.
CH-92-34 32
-------
Tabled Frequency of AppUeaM^ Questions; Stote Programs
Frequently
(Over 25%)
Occasionally
(10-25%)
Infrequently
(1-10%)
Almost Never
ซ!*)
. ,
Number of Major
Sources
: " ^ ' NtซflซteBi(M^k*4-1^Fซ^ปiซ^ซ - ^ :" ," ' X \ "^ , - \
CO
MI
OK
WY
*" % \ "
AZ
CT
DE
ffl
NJ
TX
>
AL
AR
GA
KY
NE
X
X
X
X
95
235
316
70
, ฐ ;; - ifew^(^^$ow^^3f*ซmซ*ซBw^o' v ' ----'.-. -,"'--v ^ s-Vx^
X
X
X
X
X
, ?Jew/M , " - " " '""i-\ """ " , * --
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No Data
140
518
402
366
336
105
194
124
20
30
393
392
35
410
126
387
137
16
304
172
171
Kansas did not provide a response to this question.
33
-------
When asked if they allow public access to source files that contain copies of operating
permit applications, operating permits, inspection reports, and other related information, 36 of the
38 States (Kansas and Maine did not provide a response to the survey question) with operating
permit programs responded that they did.
3.8 Permit Issuance
Survey questions on permit issuance asked whether existing air quality compliance
problems are addressed through operating permits. Twenty-nine States reported that they are.
Twenty-nine States noted that a permittee is required to be in compliance with all other
applicable air laws and regulations before a permit can be issued.
States were asked how they intended to implement each of the new technology-based
standards to be promulgated under Section 112 of the CAAA (i.e., air toxics). Eighteen States
plan to use incorporation by reference and 19 States plan rule revision. Six States indicated plans
to use other means.
CH-92-34 34
-------
4.0 POTENTIAL IMPACT OF TITLE V
4.1 Types of EPA Assistance Needed
In response to the survey question on whether there was any assistance that EPA could
provide in making legislative changes, 12 States indicated a need.
States were asked to prioritize certain listed types of assistance needed from EPA in
implementing an operating permit program. States were about evenly divided in indicating as
a high priority the following choices listed in the survey:
permit tracking/data management systems,
complete application guidance,
model permit conditions for selected source categories, and
training seminars.
States were also asked for recommendations and suggestions for EPA in designing and
implementing the Title V operating permit program. Twenty-three out of 50 States responded
to this question, listing a wide variety of responses that were not very specific. Some of the
common responses were (1) EPA should minimize its role in terms of review and veto authority;
(2) EPA should supply detailed guidance to the States, especially in the areas of model permit
conditions; (3) more funding was needed; (4) disruption of existing programs should be
minimized; and (5) a reasonable time frame for implementation should be allowed.
4.2 Adequacy of Rules and Legislation
States were asked to assess their current status regarding certain Title V requirements,
noting the adequacy of their existing legislation and rules. The areas were: (1) operating permit
application and renewal procedures, including completeness criteria; (2) monitoring and reporting
requirements; (3) operating permit fees; (4) personnel and funds to administer the program; (5)
procedures for permit modifications; (6) authority to issue, terminate, revise and reissue
CH-92-34 35
-------
operating permits to set emission limits, and to enforce conditions and fees; (7) public notice
and review procedures; and (8) public access to operating permit records.
Adequacy of existing legislation and rules is an important issue, since seeking new enabling
legislation and promulgating new administrative rules will be time consuming to States.
Responses to State assessments showed that the area most often lacking adequate legislation was
that of permit fees. Results of this survey question are summarized in Table 7. States generally
recorded that they had adequate provisions for permit application requirements, monitoring and
reporting requirements, permit modification, enforcement, public notice, and public access, but
inadequate provisions for operating permit fees. Personnel and funding needs and permit
modification provisions were areas of uncertainty for several States.
When asked what other constraints States perceived in implementation of an acceptable
Title V program, 13 States listed their concerns. The two constraints most frequently noted were
insufficient staff for various program needs and direct fee payment to the air agency rather than
the general fund.
CH-92-34 36
-------
labieJ ^Stai& Assessment to A^^
pGMBEfcOFStATHK ,, , , -,
CATEGORY*
ADEQUATE
INADEQUATE
LEGISLATION
INADEQUATE
RULES
- -- -- V \ -^
, y; x,\--
NOT CERTAIN
: s \ , -- ,;, "- ,; ,- " ?m&te^^&*ฅ&**^* - I"; - ,, "--. r>""",<.^\-->
la
Ib
2a
2b
No Program
s
la
2b
2a
2b
No Program
1
1
4
11
- - , Mowt
2
4
14
1
1
l
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
l
(jr^^t^^gfe^rumwH "- -x- "- ^-%s -^^"\- ,c
2
2
1
2
1
2
;, "" -'- 0$#swg&r0diฃซs s -: , - \-,' ,--"*" - ;-
la
Ib
2a
2b
No Program
1
1
8
: -> ...... %
la
Ib
2a
2b
No Program
1
1
1
2
8
3
J>emxmd..aaฃ1?ua& ::-
1
1
1
6
1
2
1
2
1
, - \ %, ..
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
^ ^ ^ ^ % " vy ^
1
2
7
1
,,..,,, ..<,., " % " , ^" ' J^dwesforBBraaaModificaficm''--5 ~ " .^-^..v,.-^ -.\---^^
la
2b
2a
2b
No Program
1
15
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
7
1
: - Aซ^r&y&fef^T^sซ0^^^ -%*..4"^\'
la
2b
2a
2b
No Program
2
2
13
1
1
3
'-'' '' PubSc Notice Review Ftocedtn
la
2b
2a
2b
No Program
la
2b
2a
2b
No Program
1
2
2
12
1
4
4
17
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
**
2
1
1
2
1
1
- -, " X-
1
1
3
1
^VA***ป*-w&atoir3f?ซซ*a# - * - -- <- \x-\\x--
i
i
2t> H New/Modifซi$ified,4ซ<( BiisUog-Souw^ ~^ฅe^tte^d&$mm ittifeiM
2
1
1
** " -;/^^ \. ; c:^V^;
>Sf#$ I " :---"" ^ -.--^^ -\^-\--x-^x
-------
5.0 SCOPE OF LOCAL OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
This section describes the applicability of the 26 independent local agency operating permit
programs with regard to the type of pollutants regulated as well as types of sources (e.g., NSPS,
NESHAP, nontraditional sources) subject to operating permits. As previously noted in Section
1.22, the remaining local agencies which submitted surveys appeared to implement their
respective State's operating permit programs by augmenting such programs with local air
pollution control requirements. The applicability of these local agencies' operating permit
programs was not analyzed for the purpose of this report. Section 5.1 describes the type of
pollutants covered by States programs, Section 52 describes the types of sources covered, Section
5.3 pertains to operating permits which cover multiple emission points, and Section 5.4 describes
the types of nontraditional sources included in State operating permit programs.
5.1 Pollutants Covered
Twenty-five of the 26 local agencies analyzed indicated that their programs regulate criteria
pollutants. The local agency in Nashville, Tennessee does not. Nine of the 26 local agencies
do not regulate Section 112 (hazardous) pollutants. These agencies are: Evansville, Indiana;
Grant County, Washington; Hammond, Indiana; Kings County, California; Lake County,
California; Memphis-Shelby County, Tennessee; Northern Sonoma County, CA; Springfield,
Oregon; and Vigo County, Indiana. Thirteen of the 26 local agencies cover toxic pollutants not
covered by Section 112, including nine agencies which issue renewable permits to both new and
existing sources.
5.2 Sources Covered
All but one of the 26 local agencies (Amador County, California) regulate sources which
emit more than 25 TPY of any pollutant, after control. All 26 local agencies regulate sources
which emit 25 or less tpy. Only three (Amador County, California; Hammond, Indiana; and St.
CH-92-34 38
-------
Louis, Missouri) of the 26 local agencies do not regulate sources subject to New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS), and only four (Amador County, California; Hammond, Indiana;
Kings County, California; and St. Louis Missouri) do not regulate sources subject to National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS).
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies (two agencies did not provide a response to- the survey
question) stated that some sources are exempt from the operating permit program. The choices
for the basis for exemption were low size or capacity, de minimis level or "other". Four agencies
checked all three bases.
There were nine local agencies which checked the "other" box. Like the State agency
responses, the local agencies were also somewhat confused by this question. Responses given
were specific source categories or source types. One agency (Ventura County, CA.) stated that
a basis for exempting a source was if it experienced difficulty in administering control
techniques. Table 8 lists the local agency responses to the specific source exemptions presented
in the survey.
5.3 Multiple Emission Points
Title V states that a single permit may be issued to a facility with multiple sources.
Twenty-five of the 26 local agencies analyzed responded to the question regarding the coverage
of a facility with multiple emission points under a single operating permit. Of these 25
respondents, 20 reported that their program did allow for this coverage.
5.4 Nontraditional Analyzed Sources
Of the 26 agencies analyzed, 23 indicated coverage of at least one type of nontraditional
source. Specifically, 11 agencies regulate landfills, 12 agencies regulate publicly-owned
treatment works, two agencies regulate compost, 16 agencies regulate gasoline service stations,
21 agencies regulate sources typically covered by RCRA, and eight agencies stated that they
CH-92,34 39
-------
Table 8 Types of Sources Exempted From the Operating Permit Requirement; Local Agency Programs
(A dash (-) indicates that the local agency did not respond)
Woodstoves
Asbestos
Demolition
Renovations
Radionuclide
Sources
Residential
Boilers/
Furnaces
- : , '; - H&wMad^
Grant County, WA
'-, "> '
Chattanooga-Hamilton
County, TN
f
Huntsville, AL
Jefferson Cty, AL
Wayne Qy, MI
St. Louis, Qy, MO
Tulsa, OK
x '
^ , y '
X
X
Air Conditioning
Comfort
Ventilation
Systems
Nonstatutory
ICE
Other
i <. i , , ;
X
X
';',./ " , v " '''s$*W;?M0d:8ซ4 Scutes* ป Petmft flertewalKcqwM : "", ''' ' " ? ' , - "''[ ,, > '' "* *'; '^ ''. '/ % v:
'' > , j "> , t 'lifis
X
X
X
X
' '' ' <
Amador Cty, CA
Bay Area, CA
So. Coast, AQMD
Evansville, IN
Hammond, IN
Kings Cty, CA
Lake Cty, CA
Memphis/Shelby Cty,
TN
X
X
X
X
X
','f ;
Monterey Bay, CA
Nashville, TN
Northern Sonoma Cty,
CA
Philadelphia, PA
Sacramento, CA
St. Louis, MO
San Diego, CA
Springfield, OR
Washoe Cty, NV
Ventura Qy, CA
Vigo Cty, IN
X
X
X
X'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
: j ., j&rfป!*?
X
X
' '- .&tS#Sag
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
t&jj ^ >WM>^I^ -&ป^^ ' , -,''-,
X
X
X
; fhtt NestfMeHfiged Stn
X
X
X
&ป ^w/Jyte^ilM &x>
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ipปs%?ซ|mit^iiewaia
X
X
X
X
X
!&& ~P/ฃttflif RftiWtfSJ R
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
jwwired
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' '" , ''-'-
X
X
X
X
X
^oSisii -- ; -'<, , ; '' ''""", ', -"""'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'\ " \ ', ""'**",
X
X
X
s',< ' ' *" s '
X
X
X
X
X
. X
* Some of the sources listed under "Other" exemptions include various agricultural operations, laboratory equipment for research and development, certain fuel burning equipment, storage tanks for retail dispensing, various painting
operations, storage tanks for gasoline and other organics. commercial ovens used for manufacturing plastics and non-ferrous metals, manufacturing equqraient or processes (without controls) emitting de minimi* levels of VOC, and
oil and gas drilling equipment
-------
regulate some other nontraditional source. Included in this "other" category were soil and water
decontamination processes, privately owned treatment facilities, and aeration basins.
CH-92-34 41
-------
6.0 ELEMENTS OF LOCAL AGENCY OPERATING PERMITS PROGRAMS
This section covers the comparison of local independent agency operating permit programs
(independent from State programs) to the selected Title V requirements. Section 6.1 describes
the local agencies status regarding operating permit renewal periods and enabling legislation for
implementing such programs. Section 6.2 describes application forms used by the local agencies
along with application completeness criteria methods, application completeness certification, and
general permits which cover numerous similar sources. Section 6.3 discusses local agencies
permitting fee programs. Section 6.4 describes local agencies current monitoring and reporting
requirements. Section 6.5 provides information regarding local agencies ability to reopen
operating permits for cause. Section 6.6 delineates the current requirements for public
notice/public hearing, and public comment during the review of permit applications. Section 6.7
describes permit renewal procedures used by the local agencies. Finally, Section 6.8 discusses
operating permit issuance procedures used by local agency operating permit programs.
It should be noted that this information compiled here represents responses from 26 local
agencies only. This section does not compare local agencies which implement State programs
to the Title V requirements. This section frequently refers to the operating permit program
categories listed in Section 1.0. These five categories indicate where local agencies stand with
respect to the basic intent of Title V.
6.1 Permit Renewal Cycles
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies included in this analysis, provided a response to the
survey question regarding permit renewal cycle. Of these 24 agencies, 20 agencies have a fixed
or variable permit renewal cycle and six do not currently have a permit renewal program. Of
the 20 local agencies with permit renewal programs, 18 agencies have a fixed renewal program
ranging from an annual renewal cycle to a 10 year cycle. The remaining two agencies have a
CH-9Z-34 42
-------
variable renewal cycle ranging from a 1-5 year renewal cycle to a 1-10 year renewal cycle.
Table 9 lists these 20 local agencies along with their respective fixed or variable renewal cycles.
Title V requires a fixed permit renewal cycle of not greater than 5 years. There were 18
local agencies which currently have permit renewal cycles (either fixed or variable) of 5 years
or less. Seventeen of these 18 agencies regulate both existing and new/modified sources.
The two local agencies which have a fixed or variable renewal cycle of more than 5 years
indicated that they do not currently have enabling legislation to implement a fixed renewal
program of not more than 5 years. Of the six agencies which either do not currently have a
permit renewal program or did not provide a response to the survey, only one agency (Huntsville,
Alabama) currently has enabling legislation to implement a permit renewal program.
Regarding the survey questions on the role of permit renewal, only four of the 26 local
agencies indicated that the revision of an existing operating permit initiates a new renewal period.
Two additional local agencies stated that this would be the case under certain circumstances.
Both of these agencies did not indicate what those circumstances would be.
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies provided a response to the survey question regarding
the imposition of new requkements. Eighteen of these agencies said that new requirements can
be imposed when such requirements become applicable. One agency said that new requirements
can be imposed only at permit renewal; one agency stated that new requirements can be imposed
as they become applicable and at permit renewal; one agency stated that new requirements can
be imposed as they become applicable and under certain circumstances; two agencies stated that
new requirements can be imposed only under certain circumstances; and one agency stated that
new requirements can be imposed as they become applicable at permit renewal, and under certain
circumstances. Responses to imposing new requirements under certain circumstances ranged
from requirements for source modification to discretion of the local agency.
CH-92-34 43
-------
; "-" ,.., s , Tablet Opelra^gi'^mitl^ew^C^clel'iatJodj l^ocaSAgesstcyJVegraBJS , -\ " v
i ,- -* LOCAL ACasSpr'Y*
Amador County, CA
Chattanooga-Hamilton County, TN
Bay Area, CA
South Coast Air Quality Management District,
CA
Evansville, IN
Hammond, IN
Kings, County, CA
Lake County, CA
Memphis/Shelby County, TN
Monterey Bay, CA
Nashville, TN
Northern Sonoma County, CA
Philadelphia, PA
Sacramento, CA
San Diego, CA
Springfield, OR
St. Louis, MO
Ventura County, CA
Vigo County, IN
Washoe County, NV
CA1B3Q&Y
2b
Ib
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
2b
UlNlWAt CYCLE-" < "\;> ;
1 Year
2 Years
1 Year
1 Year
2 Years
1 Year
1 Year
1 Year
1 - 10 Years
1 Year
1 Year
1 -5 Years
1 Year
1 Year
1 Year
10 Years
1 Year
1 Year
2 Years
1 Year
44
-------
The listing below summarizes the 26 local agency responses to the survey question
regarding things which the operating permit renewal process can do. (There were four agencies
which did not respond to this survey question).
correct errors 19 local agencies
incorporate new local requirements 15 local agencies
incorporate new federal requirements 16 local agencies
codify voluntary source reductions 10 local agencies
develop additional requirements
beyond State or Federal Requirements 18 local agencies
other (e.g., increase enforceability) 2 local agencies
(e.g., increase enforceability)
6.2 Application Form
Of the 26 local agencies analyzed, 24 agencies use a standard permit application form.
Thirteen of these 24 agencies also use different application forms for various source categories.
Of the two agencies not using a standard application form, one agency uses a different
application for various source categories and the other agency does not use an application form.
Sixteen of these local agencies are currently using a checklist or policy for determining
application completeness. Additionally, 21 of the local agencies analyzed require that the
application be certified by a corporate official signifying that the application is complete.
Twelve of the local agencies analyzed allow for the issuance of a general permit which
would cover numerous similar sources. This includes seven agencies with permit renewal for
both existing and new/modified sources.
6.3 Permitting Fees
Almost all (24) of the local agencies analyzed collect permit fees. The remaining two
agencies (Wayne County, Michigan and St. Louis, Missouri) which do not collect fees also do
CH-92-34 45
-------
not have enabling legislation for implementing a fee program sufficient to cover all permitting
program costs.
Twenty-one of the local agencies analyzed currently collect annual operating fees, 22
collect permit application fees and 19 collect some other fee which includes annual inspection
fees, fees to recoup costs associated with public notice public comment and public hearings, fees
for modeling, fees for source testing, reporting/monitoring fees, and permit renewal fees.
Twenty-three of these local agencies analyzed collect more than one type of fee.
Twenty-two of the 26 local agencies analyzed which currently collect permit fees, provided
responses to the survey question regarding the current basis for collecting permit fees. The basis
for permit fees for the local agency programs are summarized below:
Administrative costs 12 local agencies
Emissions 12 local agencies
Production 4 local agencies
Rat Fee 8 local agencies
Source Category 15 local agencies
With regards to the survey question concerning whether a fee of $25 per ton per year for
each regulated pollutant would be sufficient to recover the costs associated with the development
and implementation of an operating permit program, 11 of the 26 local agencies stated that it
would. Eight of these 26 agencies stated that this fee would not be sufficient and seven
additional agencies did not provide a response to this question. Responses to this survey question
should be evaluated with caution. In evaluating the question regarding which local agencies have
conducted a time and activity analysis to determine the actual costs incurred in operating permit
programs, 10 local agencies said that their agencies had conducted such an analysis. Six of these
10 agencies had conducted this analysis based on the cost of administering the program. Of these
six agencies, two local agencies responded that the $25 per ton fee would be sufficient to recover
costs associated with developing and implementing operating permit programs, two agencies
answered no to this question and two agencies provided no response to the question.
CH-92-34 46
-------
Local agency responses to the survey question regarding the use of fees currently collected
were as follows: nine local agencies noted that the collected fees go to the general fund, one
agency (Springfield, Oregon) sends the collected fees to a combination of a general and an
environmental fund, one agency (Grant County, Washington) sends the collected fees to a
combination of a general fund and the air program, and 11 agencies currently send their collected
fees to the air program. It should be noted that two of the 26 local agencies did not provide
responses to this question, and two agencies currently do not collect operating permit fees.
A number of the 26 local agencies that were analyzed submitted their fee schedules. Fee
schedules submitted by the local agencies also varied from agency to agency. The types of fees
which have some common ground are as follows:
annual operating fees. The local agencies analyzed base their operating fees
on a variety of factors. These factors included, output capacity (i.e., $ per
number of BTU per hour or $/ton of a given pollutant), emissions (TPY), a flat
fee (either respective or irrespective of source category and type) $ per pound
of a given pollutant per day and $ per ton of a given pollutant emitted on a
yearly basis. Fees ranged from $25 - $9387.
application fees. Several local agencies utilize a flat fee ranging from $100 to
$350 per permit application, while the application fee for the two local
agencies in Tennessee (Nashville, Tennessee and Memphis-Shelby County,
Tennessee) are the same as their annual operating fees.
annual fees for inspection. The agencies in Nashville, Tennessee and
Memphis-Shelby County, Tennessee incorporate their annual inspection fees as
a part of the annual operating permit fees. The agency in St. Louis County,
Missouri charges a flat fee of $200 for annual inspections.
6.4 Reporting Requirements
All of the 26 local agencies analyzed currently have monitoring and reporting requirements.
The following list identifies the number of agencies which track the various types of operation
data:
CH-92-34 47
-------
hours of operation 25 Local agencies
production units completed 19 Local agencies
materials used 24 Local agencies
fuel use 26 Local agencies
emissions estimates 21 Local agencies
GEMS data 21 Local agencies
stack Test data 26 Local agencies
ambient monitoring data 10 Local agencies
other 3 Local agencies
The types of data noted in the "other" category were malfunction and maintenance data, and other
data used to assess the proper operation of the control system. Two of the three agencies which
checked the "other" box stated that the data required is determined on a case-by-case basis.
Nine of the 26 local agencies stated that the reported data are maintained in computer files.
Of these nine agencies, one agency noted that the data contained in the computer files could be
transferred to the EPA via modem, four agencies could forward the computerized data to the EPA
via mail, two additional agencies noted that the computerized data could be forwarded to EPA
via mail or modem, and two additional agencies did not specify by which mode computerized
data could be forwarded to the EPA.
6.5 Reopen for Cause
All of the local agencies analyzed noted that they currently can reopen an operating permit
for cause. The following list summarizes the circumstances by which the agencies can reopen
an operating permit for cause:
Adoption of new State/Local regulation 20 local agencies
Adoption of new Federal regulation 16 local agencies
Correction of a significant error 19 local agencies
Clarification or correction of minor error 19 local agencies
Reflection of name or ownership change 21 local agencies
Other 3 local agencies
CH-92-34 48
-------
Reasons for reopening for cause which were stated in the "other" category included reopening
a permit for cause as a result of a source becoming a public nuisance and whenever the agency
determines the necessity to reopen for cause.
In a related question regarding the scope of review for permits reopened for cause, 18 of
the 26 local agencies consider only the emission units directly affected, and three consider the
entire source when reopening a permit for cause. Four of the 25 agencies noted that a
combination of scopes of review are considered when reopening a permit for cause. One agency
did not provide a response to this question.
6.6 Notice, Public Hearing, Public Comment Requirements
Of the 26 local agencies analyzed, 24 agencies responded to this survey question. None
of these agencies noted that they notify adjacent States upon receipt of an operating permit
application. However, the agency in San Diego, California noted that all adjacent air districts
are given notice upon receipt of a permit application for sources subject to New Source Review
(NSR). Seven of these 24 local agencies stated that they notify the general public upon receipt
of a permit application. These seven agencies are: Hammond, Indiana; Nashville, Tennessee;
Northern Sonoma County, California; San Diego, California; Springfield, Oregon; Ventura
County, California; and Wayne County, Michigan.
Thirteen of the 26 local agencies currently provide copies of the draft operating permit and
related materials to the public. Twenty-two agencies currently have some type of public
comment/public hearing requirements. Sixteen of these 22 agencies have a permit renewal
program and regulate both existing and new/modified sources.
01-92-34 49
-------
6.7 Permit Review Procedure
Twenty-four of the 26 agencies responded that they have incorporated a time limit on the
review of permit applications. These time limits were typically, 30, 60, 90, 180 days, and one
year.
Twenty-two local agencies stated that their permits can include conditions which go beyond
underlying SIP or other regulatory requirements. Of these 22 agencies, one agency (Memphis-
Shelby County, Tennessee) stated that this authority was used in response to a Federal request
or on a case-by-case basis. Twenty of these 22 agencies stated that this authority was used only
on a case-case basis, as determined through the permitting process. One additional agency did
not specify by which authority permit conditions could go beyond underlying SIP or other
regulatory requirements. These case-by-case determinations regarding requirements not explicitly
stated in the SIP or other regulations generally involve emission limits and recordkeeping,
operating conditions and reporting requirements.
Table 10 summarizes how often applicability questions arise during the permit review
process that call for an agency determination on what regulatory provisions apply.
Thirteen of the 26 local agencies reported that they include special conditions in operating
permits to accommodate batch processing operations.
Twenty-four of the 26 local agencies stated they did allow public access to source files that
contain copies of operating permit applications, operating permits, inspection reports, and other
related information. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Ventura County, California currently do not.
6.8 Permit Issuance
Twenty-two of the 26 local agencies stated that existing air quality compliance problems
are addressed through operating permits. Twenty-four of these agencies reported that a permittee
CH-92-34 50
-------
Frequently
(over 25%)
Occasionally
(10-25%)
Infrequently
(1-10%)
Almost Never
(< 1%)
Grant County, WA
Chattanooga-Hamilton County, TN
, Ke^&fodSM Md Btisfiftg Sources- No $em&i
Huntsville, AL
Jefferson County, AL
St. Louis County, MO
Tulsa, OK
Wayne County, MI
X
X
X
Amador County, CA
Bay Area, CA
South Coast AQMD, CA
Evansville, IN
Hammond, IN
Kings County, CA
Lake County, CA
Memphis-Shelby County, TN
Monterey Bay, CA
Nashville, TN
Northern Sonoma County, CA
Philadelphia, PA
Sacramento, CA
San Diego, CA
St. Louis, MO
Springfield, OR
Ventura County, CA
Vigo County, CA
Washoe County, NV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
51
-------
must be in compliance with all other applicable air laws and regulations before a permit can be
issued.
Almost all (23) of the local agencies analyzed responded to the survey question which
asked how they intend to implement each of the new technology-based standards anticipated for
promulgation under Section 112 of the proposed Clean Air Act Amendments (i.e., air toxics).
Of these 23 agencies, six agencies plan to use incorporation by reference only, eight additional
agencies plan to use rule revision only, five additional agencies plan to use both incorporation
by reference and rule revision, two additional agencies currently have not decided which method
to use, one additional agency may receive delegation from the State and one additional agency
(Kings County, California) stated that these technology-based standards may already be covered
under the States' current air toxics program.
CH-92-34 52
-------
7.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF TITLE V
This section covers the potential impact of Title V on the 26 local agencies with programs
independent from their State's program. It should be noted that this section does not cover the
potential impacts of Title V on the other local agencies which implement their respective States'
operating permit programs. Specifically, Section 7.1 describes the types of assistance which local
agencies will need to obtain from EPA in order to properly implement the Title V requirements,
and Section 72 describes the adequacy of local agencies rules and regulations for promulgating
and implementing operating permit programs consistent with the Title V requirements.
7.1 Types of EPA Assistance Needed
Twenty-two of the 26 local agencies provided a response to the survey question which
asked if there was any assistance that EPA could provide in making legislative changes. Of these
22 agencies, only five agencies indicated a need and one additional agency (Monterey Bay,
California) was not certain as to whether any EPA assistance was necessary.
Thirteen of the 26 local agencies prioritized the types of assistance needed from EPA in
implementing an operating permit program. Ten additional agencies stated that EPA assistance
was not needed in order to implement the Title V requirements. An additional three agencies did
not provide a response to the survey. Of these 13 agencies the following choices were the
highest priorities (in that order) noted:
model permit conditions for selected source categories,
complete application guidance and training seminars,
permit tracking/data management systems.
Of the 26 local agencies analyzed, 10 agencies provided recommendations and suggestions
for EPA in designing and implementing the Title V operating permit program. The responses
varied; however, some of the more common recommendations included (1) making the program
CH-92-34 53
-------
an enhancement of the existing program, (2) not requiring permits to be changed after EPA
review, (3) allowing for permit revisions upon renewal, (4) phasing in the permit program over
a five year period, (5) ensuring that local agencies share with the State agencies revenues
generated from permit fees, (6) standardizing permit application forms and allowing S/L agencies
to modify forms as needed, (7) tying Section 105 funding to operating permit requirements, and
(8) providing Federal oversight and enforceability.
7.2 Adequacy of Rules and Legislation
Almost all (25) of the local agencies analyzed provided responses to the question regarding
agencies assessment of their current status regarding certain Title V requirements. These
responses are summarized in Table 11.
Only two of the 26 local agencies reported other constraints perceived in the
implementation of an acceptable Title V program. These constraints were, (1) ensuring an
adequately trained staff and (2) adequate funding.
CH-92-34 54
-------
\ - - - Table it - Local Ageades -Assessei&tt to A&qaacy ofeRafe^^aatd Repfe
(Pis dash (-} |as &is OBt^oiy ji^cซRฃ $4 ^ป>ป'ptf respo]as& from $9 Jjnfy 9$snc
CATEGORY*
ADEQUATE
AUTHORITY
!. ' v. % -.'V- \" ...... " .. . v $$
la
Ib
2a
2b
1
4
16
INADEQUATE
LEGISLATION
INADEQUATE RULES
tnrit Aiutfw>'ifffii.'ftijujln>tn ntn
WW^ ^pWiUJW- PS^mipWCtffs.
1
1
2
1
tk>tป 0 ;v<-\ ^
yut^t^egOtjrV^
NOT CERTAIN
^ s^ ป%*<.%
1.
; ,- - , 0 - , '\ .Jtfwiu^OTd&sK^I^ ; ^ ^ - ,,;^ s%V,;* ซ\.;%
la
Ib
2a
2b
1
5
17
L - " ' - "
la
Ib
2a
2b
2
13
, ' % %""
la
Ib
2a
2b
1
10
1
1
1
1
<^p^S,?ซrtmtBซs -- ~ , ^ ,^ ,",,;^ - ** ^v
1
1
2
1
1
1
6
%%MMMMl*ii!fc*s s,/s*x/VSss %< ,\- ;'\5;-
1
3
2
1
2
2
7
j s, '->- /- " , / ^^ocrfHKsfKfl'eamtModaicaliM, '- ,^ ss ^;S ^X- - \\ V.
la
Ib
2a
2b
: , " "AaJ|
la
Ib
2a
2b
1
5
16
1
4
15
1
1
3
2
*ซW9ซฃn$f^RXปซk *fldfttfem ft)*** aM j
i
l
4
1
2
\\ ^
PWf* o s *v xv.
1
1
- ,, " M&&taJb$wfcwiMiซ* >-."<,- ' , ^;---\x v
la
Ib
2a
2b
5
17
1
1
1
2
4
- , , PnbScAccesito-fenHilSeeod* "*" , ^ ,.-- ^^
la
Ib
2a
2b
1
5
17
1
1
1
1
* la - New/Modified Sources - No Permit Renewal (1 agency in this category)
Ib - New/Modified Sources - Permit Renewal ( 1 agency in this category)
2a - New/Modified and Existing Sources - No Permit Renewal (5 agencies in this category)
2b - New Modified and Existing Sources - Permit renewal (19 agencies in this category)
55
-------
Appendix A
Questionnaire
CH-92-34 A-l
-------
Operating Permit Questionnaire
for
State and Local Air Pollution Control Agencies
I. Agency Information
11. Background
III. Applicability
IV. Operating Permit Issuance
V. Permit Modification
VI. Permit Renewal
VII. Work Load
VIII. Fees
IX. Enabling Legislation
X. General
XI. Recommendations
XII. Additional Questions for Local Control Agencies
XIII. Potential Impact of Pending Legislation
This questionnaire is intended to elicit the best information available on
the design and implementation, of State and local operating permit programs for
air pollutant sources. Althougn we seek complete answers, informed estimates
are acceotable, particularly in answering work load questions.
For the purposes of this questionnaire, a "source" is defined as ail of
the pollutant-emitting activities that belong to the same industrial grouping,
are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under
common ownership or control. Further, a "major source" is any source that
emits more than 100 tons per year after control. We prefer that answers to
this questionnaire be consistent with these definitions. If your agency uses
other definitions of "source" or "major source", however, and it is
impractical to convert your answers, please explain below and answer using
your agency's definitions.
When transmitting responses to the questionnaire, it would be aopreciated
if a copy of your agency's rules, policies, and guidelines pertaining to the
operating permit program is enclosed. For convenience, you may simoly enclose
items that differ from or are in addition to laws and rules contained, in the
"State Air Regulations" binders published by the Bureau of National Affairs
(SNA).
-------
Completed questionnaires plus enclosures should be mailed by April 11,
1990, to: .
Bill Becker
STAPPA/ALAPCO
444 N. Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
-------
I. Aoencv Information
Agency Name:
Address:
Name of Individual Completing Survey:
Telephone Number:
II. Background
A. Does your agency currently have an operating Yes f ]
penult program for air pollution sources? No [ ]
[If your response to Question A Is NQ,
please answer II.B and then skip to the
the questions in Section X: General on
page 30 and Section XI: Recommenoations
on page 33.]
3. If your agency does not have an operating permit
program, is it in the process of developing one?
Yes. [ ]
- In the planning stages. [ ]
- Draft rules prepared. [ j
- Awaiting decision by governing board/
commission. '" }
No. ]
- Constrained legislatively ! ]
- No interest ; ]
Other.
Please describe:
-------
C. If your response to Question A is YES please
answer the following:
Are operating permits required for sources Yes [ ]
having construction permits? No [ ]
Are operating permits for sources having Yes [ ]
construction permits plus those not No [ ]
previously subject to new source review
(I.e., grandfathered sources)?
0. How extensive has your agency's experience been
with implementing your operating permit program?
Less than 2 years. [ ]
2-5 years. [ ]
5 - 10 years.
III. Applicability
More than 10 years. [ ]
Please use th.1s space for any additional comments on the
background of your agency's operating permit program.
A. What types of sources does the operating permit program
apply to?
New and/or modified sources only. [ ]
Existing plus new and/or modified' sources. [ ]
Other. [ ]
Please describe:
-------
8. Which pollutants are covered under the operating
permit program? Please check all applicable boxes.
Criteria pollutants (i.e., SO,, ISP, PM-'IO, NO,,
CO, VOC, lead). * r> ]
Section 112 pollutants (e.g., benzene, arsenic) [ ]
Toxic pollutants not covered by Section 112. r i
(Please attach list.)
Other pollutants. [ ]
Please list:
C. What sources are covered by the operating permit
program? Please check all applicable boxes.
Sources that emit more than 100 tpy of any
pollutant, after control (Al sources). [ ]
Sources that emit froa 25 tpy through 100 tpy
of any pollutant, after control (A2 sources). [ ]
Sources that emit 25 tpy or less of any
pollutant, after control (B sources).
Section 111 sources [subject to new source
performance standards (NSPS)].
Section 112 sources [subject to national
emissions standard for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP)]. [ ]
Other. [ ]
Please specify:
-------
0. Permitting of these sources is the typical mechanism
by which the following are implemented. Please
check all applicable boxes.
State Implementation Plan (SIP). [ ]
CAA Section 111. [ ]
CAA Section 112. [ ]
S/L air toxics requirements. [ ]
Other. [ ]
Please specify:
E.I Are there sources that are exempted from the Yes [ ]
operating permit requirement? No [ ]
E.2 On what basis are sources exempted from the
operating permit requirement?
* -
Low size or production capacity. [ ]
De minlmis emission level. [ ]'
Other. ( ]
Please describe:
-------
E.3 What types of sources are exempted from the
operating permit requirement?
Woodstoves. - i
Asbestos demolition/renovations. - i
V J
Radionuclide sources. \ ]
Residential boilers/furnaces. [ ]
A1r conditioning or comfort ventilation systems. [ ]
- Nonstatlonary Internal combustion engines. f ]
Other. [ ]
Please specify and/or attach list:
F.I Can your agency cover multiple emission points Yes [ ]
located within the sane source under a single No [ ]
operating permit?
F.2 If facilities are permitted on an emissions unit
basis, are data on permitted emissions aggregated
on a plantwide basis?
For emissions inventory purposes? Yes [ ]
NO [ ]
For reporting compliance status? Yes ]
NO r ]
Other. Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Please explain:
-------
H. For what purposes art fugitive emissions considered
in the review of operating permit applications?
Not at all. r ]
Applicability determinations. [ ]
Writing permit conditions. [ ]
Other. [ 1
Please 11st:
I. Are nontradltlonal sources covered under the Yes [ ]
operating permit program? No [ j
If YES, do these nontradltlonal sources include:
: Landfills. [ ]
Publicly-owned treatment works. [ ]
Compost. [ ]
Gasoline service stations. [ ]
Sources typically covered by RCRA (e.g.,
hazardous waste incinerators, waste
co-fired boilers and furnaces). L ]
Others C 1
Please 11st.
Additional comments on the applicability of the
operating permit requirement.
-------
IV. Operating Permit Issuance
A. Permit Application
A.I Does your agency use a standard operating Yes [ 1
permit application form? No [ j
If Yfl, please attach a copy of this form.
A.2 Are there source categories that have different Yes [ ]
application forms? No [ ]
If YES, please list and attach copies.
A.3 Does the individual operating permit application
include a comoliance plan that sets out a scnedule
of measures the permittee will follow to:
Achieve future compliance with the SIP or other Yes [ ]
requirement? No [ ]
Maintain existing compliance with SIP or other Yes [ ]
requirement? No [ ]
A.4 Does your operating permit program include general Yes [ ]
permits covering numerous similar sources without No [ ]
requiring individual applications?
A.5 Do you have a check 11st or policy defining Yes [ ]
application completeness criteria? No ; ]
If YES, please summarize or attach a copy.
A.6 Does the permit application include a Yes [ ]
certification by a facility official that the No [ ]
information contained 1n the application is
accurate?
-------
3. Notice Requirements
B.I Is notice given to the general public and/or to Yes [ ]
interested parties on receipt of the application No [ ]
for an operating permit?
If YES, to whom 1s notice of receipt of the
application given?
Ganeral public. [
. All adjacent States. [ ]
Adjacent States that would be adversely affected
by the emissions. [ 1
Others. [ 1
Please 11st:
If Nfl, skip to C. Public Review.
8.2 For what sources Is notice given?
Al sources. ' [ ]
Al and A2 sources. [ ]
Sources subject to federal standards
(e.g., NSPS/NESHAP). C 1
Air toxics sources. I 1
. Other. ' I ]
Please 11st:
10
-------
3.2 When is notice of a pending operating permit application
given to the public?
On receipt of the operating permit application.
When the draft permit is prepared.
Other.
Please describe:
3.4 How is public notice given of the pending operating
permit application?
Public notice in the local newspaper.
Notification by mail to affected parties.
General bulletin.
Notice printed in State register. ]
Notification to EPA. ]
. Other. 1
Please describe:
3.5 Who is responsible for issuing the public notice of
the pending operating permit application?
The State or local agency.
The applicant.
Other.
Please describe:
11
-------
C. Public
C.I Is a copy of the draft operating permit and YSS
related materials given to the general public No
and/or to interested parties prior to issuance
of the operating permit?
If YฃS, to whom is a copy of the draft operating
permit given?
General public.
All adjacent States.
Adjacent States that would bt adversely
affected by the emissions.
Others.
Please list:
C.2 Please check the statements below that describe the
public hearing/public comment requirements of the
operating permit program.
There are no public hearing/public comment
requirements.
. There are public hearing and comment requirements
for specified source types.
. Public hearings are held on a case-by-case basis.
. Public hearings are held only if a specified
number of citizens request one.
. Public hearings are held only if an affected party
requests one (e.g., an adjoining property owner).
. Public hearings are held if requested by a public
official (e.g. mayor of town in which source is
located).
. Other.
Please describe:
12
-------
C.3 How frequently are public hearings held for operating
permit applications?
Frequently (over 25%). f j
Occasionally (10-25X). ( j
Infrequently (1-10%). [ j
Almost never (less than IS). [ j
C.4 What is the length of the public comment period for
written comments on the proposed operating permit?
Case-by-case. [ ]
20 days, unless extended. r ]
30 days, unless extended. }
' Other. r ]
Please describe:
0. Review Procedure
D.I Does the operating permit application review Yes [ ]
procedure include a completeness determination? No [ ]
If YES, what information is typically lacking In
a permit application that is determined to be
incomplete?
0.2 Is there a time limit on the agency's review of a ves [ ]
permit application? No [ ]
If YES, what is that time limit?
0.3 Does the permit automatically issue if your Yes [ ]
agency fails to act within the time limits No [ ]
specified?
-------
0.4 Are then any procedures your agency follows to Yes [ ]
expedite the review of pending operating permit No [ ]
applications (e.g., model permit conditions)?
If US, please explain and/or attach copies.
0.5 Ooes your agency have the authority to Include Yes [ ]
permit conditions- that go beyond underlying SIP No [ ]
or other regulatory requirements?
If Yฃฃ, 1s this authority exercised:
Only in response to a Federal request? [ ]
On a case-by-case need, as determined through
the permitting process? [ ]
Only under other limitations? [ ]
Please describe:
0.6 How frequently are determinations made on a case-by-
case basis during the permit review process regarding
requirements that are not explicitly required by the
SIP or other regulations such as:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
(>25X) (10-25%) (1
Emission limits. [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]
Operating conditions. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Compliance methods. [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]
Monitoring. [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]
Reporting. [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]
Record keeping. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
-------
0.7 How often during the operating permit review process
do applicability questions arise that call for an
agency determination to clarify what regulatory
provisions apply (e.g., classification of source
as a paint coating versus paint Impregnating
operation)?
Frequently (over 255). [ ]
Occasionally (10-25X). [ ]
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ]
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ]
D.8 Are the SIPs and other regulatory requirements on
which the operating permit are based:
Source category specific? [ ]
Individual source specific? [ ]
Both source category and individual source specific? [ ]
Other? [ ]
Please describe:
0.9 Are special conditions included in operating Yes [ ]
permits to accommodate batch process operations? No [ ]
If YES, please describe.
0.10 Does your agency have a policy and/or procedure Yes [ ]
for handling confidential information? No f ]
If YES, please attach a copy of this policy and/or
procedure.
0.11 Ooes your agency allow public access to source Yes [ ]
files that contain copies of operating permit No [ ]
applications, operating permits, inspection
reports, and other information related to the
operating permit?
15
-------
0.12 How often 1s a construction permit Issued as an
operating permit without significant changes?
Frequently (over 25%). [ ]
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ]
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ]
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ]
0.13 Have operating pernlt requirements and processing Yes [ ]
ever delayed Issuance of construction permits? No [ ]
If IES, please describe how frequently this occurs.
Frequently (over 25%). [ ]
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ]
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ]
: Almost never (less than 1%). [ ]
E. Permit Issuance
E.I Ooes the agency use the operating permit Yes [ ]
process to address existing air quality No [ ]
compliance problems?
E.2 Is a permittee required to be in compliance with Yes [ ]
all other applicable air quality laws and No [ ]
regulations before an operating permit can be
Issued to that permittee?
F. Appeals Process
F.I Is there an established process whereby the Yes [ ]
applicant can appeal the denial or the terms No [ ]
and conditions of an operating permit?
If YES, please describe.
16
-------
F.2 Is there an established process whereby the Yes [ ]
general public or an Interested party can appeal No r ]
the Issuance, denial, or terms and conditions of l
a permit?
If Iฃฃ, pleasa describe.
G. Report1no and Recordkeeolnq
G.I What types of data on the operation of the
permitted facility are required to be reported
under the operating permit system?
Hours of operation. [ ]
Production units completed. { ]
Materials used. ' [ ]
Fuel use. { ]
Emissions estimates [ ]
CEMS data. ' [ ]
Stack test data. [ ]
Ambient monitoring data. [ ]
Other. [ ]
Please describe:
G.2 Are the reported data kept in computerized files? Yes [ ]
No [ ]
G.3 Can the data reported by the permittee and Yes [ ]
maintained by the agency be forwarded to EPA No [ ]
in a computer file?
By modem. [ ]
By mall. C 1
1 T
ซ t
-------
V. Permit Modification
A. Reopen for Cause
A.I Under what circumstances can an operating permit
be reopened for cause?
An operating permit cannot be reopened for cause. [ ]
On adoption of an applicable new S/L regulation. [ ]
On adoption of an applicable new Federal regulation. [ ]
To correct a significant error. [ ]
For clarification or to correct minor error [ ]
To reflect a name or ownership change. [ ]
Other. [ 1
Please explain:
A.2 How often are operating permits reopened for cause
for any of the above reasons?
. Frequently (over 25X). C 1
. Occasionally (10-25X). C 1
. Infrequently (1-10%). C ]
Almost never (less than 1%). C 1
A.3 What is the scope of review for permits reopened
for cause?
. Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. C ]
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ J
Entire source. C J
-------
3. Reopen On Permittee's Request
3.1 Under what circumstances can a permit be reooenea
based on a request or application by the permittee?
A permit cannot be reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee. [ j
Administrative changes (e.g., nan* or ownership r i
change). L J
Inadvertant errors in calculations [ j
Process changes retaining use of the sane r ]
equipment.
Changes in raw materials stored, combusted, and/or [ ]
utilized without increased emissions.
Changes in reporting requirements. [ ]
To incorporate source modifications. [ ]
To correct a significant error. [ ]
To reflect an emissions tradeoff or bubble. [ ]
Other. ; [ ]
Please explain:
3.2 How often arซ permits reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee?
Frequently (over 25%). [ ]
Occasionally (10-25%).
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ]
Never (less than 1%). [ ]
8.3 Can permit conditions be relaxed to be less than Yes [ ]
the applicable SIP requirements? No [ ]
If YES, please explain:
19
-------
3.4 What is the scopt of review for permit reopening on
request or application by permittee?
Directly affected emissions unit's) only. [ ]
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ]
Entire source. [ ]
Additional consents for this section:
VI. Permit Renewal
A.I Does your agency issue operating permits for a Yes [ ]
fixed tana? No [ ]
A.2 If Yฃฃ, how long is the permit renewal cycle? years
A.3 If the penalt renewal cycle differs for different
source types and/or emission units at the sane
plant, please explain and give examples below.
A.4 What 1s the rationale for the length(s) of the
renewal cycle(s)? Are cycles adjusted to balance
work load?
A.5 Does revision of an existing operating permit Yes [ ]
Initiate a new renewal period? No [ ]
Under certain circumstances? [ ]
Please explain:
-------
A.6 Can new requirements (such as BACT,' NESHAP) be
Imposed?:
As they become applicable. [ ]
Only at renewal. [ ]
Under other circumstances. [ ]
PI east explain:
A.7 Can the operating perilt renewal process be used
by the agency as an opportunity to: (check as many
as apply)
Correct errors? [ ]
Incorporate newly-adopted S/L requirements? [ ]
(e.g., BACT, RACT}
Incorporate newly-adopted federal requirements? [ ]
(e.g., NSPS, NESHAP)
Codify voluntary source reductions? [ ]
Develop additional requirements that go
beyond previously adopted S/L or federal
requirements (e.g., CEMS, stack testing,
reporting?
No, all conditions must be specified in rules. [ ]
Only in response to federal request. [ ]
Case-by-case need determined through
permitting process. [ 1
Only If source accepts conditions voluntarily. [ ]
. Other. C ]
Please describe:
-------
A.8 If the perilt rental process can ba used to develop
additional requirements that go beyond previously
adopted S/L or Federal requirements, are the new
requirements
Federally enforceable? [ ]
State enforceable? [ ]
A.9 How frequently are requirements in the following
areas developed during the renewal process when
they an not explicitly required by the SIP or
other applicable Federal regulations:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
. (>25X) (10-25X) (1-10%) (
-------
VII. Work Load [NOTE: Rough estimates will suffice.]
A. Please fill 1n the approximate average number of
operating permit applications received annually. Applications/
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources.
Operating permits for new or modified minor
sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating permits for minor sources.
B. Please fill In the approximate average number of
operating permits Issued annually.
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources.
Operating permits for minor sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating permits for minor sources.
C. Please fill in the approximate average number of
permits appealed annually.
Construction permits.
Operating permits for minor sources.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating permits for minor sources.
Permits/
year
23
-------
0. What is the average period of time between com-
pletion of an application and Issuance time of
a permit:
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources?
Operating permits for minor sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources?
Renewed operating permits for minor sources?
E.I. What are the annual resource requirements for the
operating permit program (Including processing,
Issuance, Inspection, surveillance, stack tests,
and data review)?
Major permits
; ซA11 permits
ฃ.2. If possible, please indicate the resource require
ments for each of the following activities.
\
Major permits:
*
- processing/Issuance.
inspection/surveillance.
stack tests/data review.
- other.
Minor permits:
- processing/Issuance.
inspection/surveillance.
- stack tests/data review.
Months/
Work vฐars
Work vears
24
-------
What portion of the permits issued:
(Please give percentage estimates.) Percent Permits
of per
Permits Year
Merely implement SIP and/or other Federal
and State requirements as applicable?
Involve specific decisions to define test
methods, reporting requirements, etc. which
art needed to implement the previously
established SIP requirements?
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements more stringent than the
existing applicable SIP limitations?
Involve specific decisions to define
alternative but equivalent requirements
to those in the existing SIP?
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements that would relax one or
more applicable SIP requirements
(assuming they would later be revised
. through a SIP revision)?
VIII. Fees
A.I What authority does the agency have to impose
fees?
None. [ ]
Can impose fees, but not fees based on amount
of emissions. [ ]
Can impose emission-based fees. [ ]
Can impose new fees without legislative approval. [ ]
Can modify its fee schedule to reflect Increased [ ]
costs, but cannot impose new fees without legislative
approval.
Explain limitations:
25
-------
A.2 Are fees collected under the operating permit Yes
program? No
If Yes, please attach a copy of the fee schedule.
A.3 How much are the fees?-(e.g., S25/ton, SSOO/application)
A.4 What types of fees are collected?
Permit application fees. [ ]
Annual operating fees. [ ]
Other (e.g., construction. Inspection, renewal [ ]
waiver request, reinspection, surveillance, trade
or allowance, excess emissions, technical assistance,
etc.).
Please describe:
A.5 If an annual operating fee is assessed, how is the
fee established?
Cost of administering permit program. [ }
Based on emissions (e.g., tons/yr). [ ]
Based on production (e.g., units/year). [ ]
Flat fee. [ ]
Based on source category. [ ]
. Other. [ ]
Please describe (e.g., per cost of activity or
service provided, relative risk, size or complexity
of source, output of source, fuel consumption,
capital cost):
26
-------
A.6 If an annual operating fee 1s assessed to cover
the costs of administering the operating penalt
program, what costs are Included?
Permit review. ( ]
Clerical services. ' [ ]
Inspection. [ ]
Monitoring. [ ]
Regulation development. [ ]
Enforcement. [ ]
Inventorying emissions. [ ]
. Modeling air quality. [ ]
Other (e.g., flat fee). [ ]
Please describe:
A.7 Does the agency apportion a percentage of Yes [ ]
overall costs, such as administrative overhead- No [ j
or area-wide monitoring network upkeep, to each
permittee's costs?
If Yes, what costs?
8. Is there a legislated maximum fee amount or cap? Yes [ ]
NO [ ]
If YES, please state amount.
C. Are there any source categories that receive Yes
operating permits but are exempted from permit NO i j
fees?
If YES, please 11st.
27
-------
0.1. How much of the cost of the following is covered
by annual fees? [Please estimate percent.]
Permit Issuance
Underlying regulation development
Enforcement
Other
0.2. Would an annual fee of $25 per ton per year of Yes [ ]
each regulated pollutant (excluding carbon No [ ]
monoxide) be sufficient to recover the costs of
developing and implementing your permit program,
including the costs of the underlying regulations?
0.3 Has the agency ever conducted a time and activity Yes [ ]
analysis to determine the actual costs incurred No [ ]
in operating its permitting program?
If Yes, when?
Please attach any relevant report.
E.I In relation to the submission of the application, when
is the fee collected?
At application. [ ]
In multiple stages. [ 1
At renewal. [ 1
ฃ.2 Where do the collected fees go? (Choose 1)
General revenue fund. C 1
Environmental protection fund C 1
Air program. [ ]
Other. C 1
Please specify:
-------
E.3 If the fees are deposited in the Central Revenue Fund,
what percent 1s returned to the permitting agency?
E.4 Does your agency have an admin1strative system Yes ( ]
in place to track fees and permit status? No [ ]
Additional comments on this section:
IX. Enabling Legislation
A. Does your enabling legislation allow you to:
Issue operating permits to all sources that [ ]
are covered by a Section 111 or 112 standard
or have 100 TPY emissions after control?
Issue operating permits that are renewable at [ ]
no more than 5-year intervals?
Assess permit fees adequate to cover all [ ]
permit program costs?
Terminate, modify, and reissue permits [ ]
for cause?
Recover civil penalties of up to $10,000/day, [ ]
and appropriate criminal penalties?
ซ Be more stringent than Federal requirements? [ ]
Please attach a copy of enabling legislation.
29
-------
Is there any assistance which EPA could provide /es [ ]
you 1n making legislative changts (e.g., model No [ ]
provisions)?
Please describe:
Additional comments on enabling legislation:
X. General
A. Are your permits (construction or operating) Yes [ ]
considered federally enforceable by EPA? No [ ]
3. : If the proposed Title IV operating perป1t Yes [ ]
program were to apply to a specified universe No [ ]
of source categories, would you have the
legislative authority to continue to permit
source categories or source sizes riot covered
by Title IV?
C. How does your agency Intend to Implement each of
the new technology-based standards anticipated for
promulgation In the future under the Section 112
air toxics provisions of pending CAA proposals?
Incorporation by reference. [ ]
Rule revision. C ]
.. Other. C ]
Please specify:
30
-------
What types of assistance do you feel you will need
from EPA in implementing an operating permit program?
(Please prioritize; 1 - highest priority.)
Permit tracking/data management systems.
Complete application guidance.
Model permit conditions for selected source
categories.
Training seminars.
Other.
Please describe:
E. Are your permit data recorded on a computer disk Yes [ ]
which is readily transferable to EPA? No [ ]
. By modem. [ ]
By mail. [ ]
F. How are your permit data used?
Enforcement purposes. [ ]
Feedback. . [ ]
Emission Inventory tracking. [ ]
Other. [ ]
Please specify:
31
-------
G. What are the major benefits of your permit system?
(Pletst prioritize; 1 most significant benefit.)
Better enforcement. [ ]
Less confusion by regulated community. [ ]
Less litigation. [ ]
Less detailed SIP rules. [ ]
Fewer source specific SIP revisions. [ ]
Other benefits. [ ]
Please specify:
H. How did the agency initially fund the development
of its operating permit and fee program?
General revenue fund. [ ]
Dedicated fund. [ ]
Source prepayment (2-stage permit for affected [ ]
sources).
Other. [ ]
Please explain:
Additional comments on these questions:
32
-------
XI. Recommendations
What recommendations/suggestions do you have for consideration
by EPA in designing and implementing the Title IV operating
permit program? L
33
-------
XII. Additional Questions for Local Agencies
A. PI east check the box which most accurately describes
your permit prograa.
Local agency operates a complete operating permit [ ]
prograa.
Local agency Issues operating pernlts for some [ ]
sources while State Issues permits for other
sources.
Describe:
Local agency participates In operating permit [ }
review but permit is issued by the State.
Describe last level of review:
Local agency has no involvement in operating [ ]
permit program; however, operating permits are
issued by the State.
Neither the State nor the local agency has an [ ]
operating permit program.
B. Are any sources required to have operating Yes [ j
permits from both the State and your agency? No [ ]
If YES, please describe types of sources
required to have both:
34
-------
Pleas* chick all functions that are performed
by your agency.
All enforcement.
Partial enforcement.
Describe:
All anblent monitoring. [ ]
Partial ambient monitoring. [ ]
Describe:
All emissions Inventory. [ ]
Partial ealssions Inventory. [ ]
Describe:
0. Please Indicate any statutory limits on the ability
of your agency to Issue operating permits and collect
a fee (check all that apply).
State law prohibits local operating permits. [ ]
Local law prohibits local operating permits. [ ]
State law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ]
Local law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ]
35
-------
XIII.
Potential Trnnaet of Pending Legislation
Clean A1r Act proposals for an operating permit
system currently pending in Congress would require
that EPA promulgate regulations establishing
minimum program requirements for S/L operating
permit programs. Recognizing that the details
of what constitutes an acceptable S/L program are
still uncertain prior to enactment, please provide
a preliminary assessment of your agency's current .
status regarding minimum requirements which may
contain 1n part the following elements:
A.
C ]
[ ]
[ ]
iL
C 1
C 3
C ]
Operating permit application and review
procedures, including completeness criteria.
Monitoring and reporting requirements.
Operating-permit fees.
Personnel and funds to administer program.
Procedures for permit modification. [ ] [ ]
Authority to issue, terminate, revise and MM
reissue operating permits, to set emission
limits and to enforce conditions and fees.
Public notice and review procedures. M M
Public access to operating permit records. [ ] [ ]
II
C 3
C ]
C 3
[ 3
[ 1
C 1
M [ 1
A adequate
IL - inadequate enabling legislation
IR - inadequate rules
N - not certain
B. Other perceived constraints on implementing an
acceptable program under Title IV?
Please explain:
-------
Appendix B
Summary of State Responses
CH-92-34 B-l
-------
Operating Permit Questionnaire
for
State and Local Air Pollution Control Agencies
I. Agency Information
11. Background
III. Applicability
IV. Operating Permit Issuance
V. Permit Modification
VI. Permit Renewal
VII. Work Load
VIII. Fees
IX. Enabling Legislation
X. General
XI. Recommendations
XII. Additional Questions for Local Control Agencies
XIII. Potential Impact of Pending Legislation
This questionnaire is intended to elicit the best Information available on
the design and implementation of State and local operating permit programs for
air pollutant sources. Although we seek complete answers, informed estimates
are acceptable, particularly in answering work load questions.
For the purposes of this questionnaire, a "source" is defined as ail of
the pollutant-emitting activities that belong to the same industrial grouoing,
are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under
common ownership or control. Further, a "major source" is any source that
emits more than 100 tons per year after control. We prefer that answers to
this questionnaire be consistent with these definitions. If your agency uses
other definitions of "source" or "major source", however, and it is
impractical to convert your answers, please explain below and answer using
your agency's definitions.
When transmitting responses to the questionnaire, it would be appreciated
if a copy of your agency's rules, policies, and guidelines pertaining to the
operating permit program is enclosed. For convenience, you may simply enclose
items that differ from or are in addition to laws and rules contained in the
"State Air Regulations" binders published by the Bureau of National Affairs
(SNA).
-------
Completed questionnaires plus enclosures should be nulled by April 11,
1990, to:
Bill Becker
STAPPA/ALAPCO
444 N. Capitol Street, NW
Washington, OC 20001
-------
I. Agency Information
Agency Name: Sunir.ary of Resoonses Provided by State Agencies
Address:
Name of Individual Completing Survey:
Telephone Number:
II. Background
A. Does your agency currently have an operating Yes ,' ] 33
permit program for air pollution sources? No [ j 12
[If your response to Question A is NQ,
please answer II.3 ana then skip to the
the questions in Section X: General on
page 30 and Section XI: aeconroenqatlons
on page 33.]
3. If your agency does not have an operating permit
program, is it in the process of developing one?
Yes. [ ] 3
In the planning stages. [ ] 3
Draft rules prepared. [ ]
- Awaiting decision by governing boara/
commission. ! ]
No.
- Constrained legislatively
- No interest
Other.
Please describe:
-------
C. If your response to Question A is YES please
answer the following:
Art operating permits reaulred for sources Yes r ] 30
having construction permits? No [ ] i
Are operating permits for sources having Yes [ ] 26
construction perilts plus those not No r j 5
previously subject to new source review
(I.e., grandfathered sources)?
0. How extensive has your agency's experience been
with implementing your operating permit prograa?
Less than 2 years. L ]
2-5 years. C 1 1
5-10 years. [ I 1
More than 10 years. [ 1 34
Please use th.1s space for any additional coonents on the
background of your agency's operating permit prograa.
Some- state agencies issue cenr.its which cover both construction/
-edification and oneration of a liven source^
Applicability
A. What types of sources does the operating permit program
apply to?
New and/or modified sources only. [ ] 10
Existing plus new and/or modified' sources. C ] 28
Other. [ 1 0
Please describe:
-------
3. Which pollutants are covered under the operating
permit program? Please check all applicable ooxes.
Criteria pollutants (i.e., SO., TSP, PM-10, NO.
CO, VOC, lead). " f j 37
Section 112 pollutants (e.g., benzene, arsenic) r ],,
J -j o
Toxic pollutants not covered by Section 112. r ]
(Please attach list.) k 25
Other pollutants. [ ] 13
Please list:
SARA Title III Section 313 Pollutants; CC?,
water, r.uroaen. G?. fiour1desซ inert gases.
hvdrooen. sulf1de;'all toxics listed by ACGIH
C. What sources are covered by the operating permit
program? Please check all applicable boxes.
Sources that emit more than 100 tpy of any
pollutant, after control (Al sources). [ ] 35
Sources that emit from 25 tpy through 100 tpy
of any pollutant, after control (A2 sources). [ ] 32
Sources that emit 25 tpy or less of any
pollutant, after control (B sources). [ ] 30
Section 111 sources (subject to new source
performance standards (NSPS)]. ; ] 35
Section 112 sources [subject to national
emissions standard for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP)]. C ] 32
Other. C 1 18
Please specify:
Responses provided could have fit ether
catecorles in this question .^_^
-------
0. Permitting of thtst sources 1s tht typical mechanism
by which the following art implemented. P1ซasa
check all applicable boxes.
State Implementation Plan (SIP). [ ] 33
CAA Section 111. [ ] 31
CAA Section 112. [ ] 31
S/L air toxics requirements. [ ] 22
. Other. - r ]
PIeast specify:
CAA part C and D (NSR) requirements; State
Acid Desosltlon Control Act; record keeping,
source testing and malfunction reporting
regulrements.
E.I Are there sources that are exempted from the Yes [ ] 35
operating permit requirement? No ( 3 2
ฃ.2 On what basis are sources exempted from the
operating permit requirement?
Low size or production capacity. [ ] 25
Qi fflifliail emission level. [ ]'23
Other. M21
Please describe:
Host states appeared confused bv this question
and provided information regarding "types cf
sources" which are given exemptions> or ~erelv
clarified the basis listed above for exempting
a source.
-------
ฃ.3 What types of sources art exempted from the
operating permit requirement?
' Woodstoves. - j 3Q
Asbestos denoHtlon/renovatlons. j 25
Radionuclide sources. r ] 20
Residential boilers/furnaces. [ ] 32
A1r conditioning or comfort ventilation systems. [ ] 32
Nonstatlonary Internal combustion engines. ,; ] 23
Other. ; ] 2o
Please specify and/or attach 11st:
See Section 2.4 Table 3
F.I Can your agency cover multiple emission points Yes [ ] 34
located within the same source under a single Mo [ 1 3
operating permit?
F.2 If facilities are permitted on an emissions unit
basis, are data on permitted emissions aggregated
on a plantwide basis?
For emissions inventory purposes? Yes
NO
For reporting compliance status? Yes
NO
Other. Yes
No
Please explain:
PS3 applicability; emission inventory and
reporting purposes: Federal applicability
]22
I 12
] 15
] 5
] 1
-------
n
H. For what purposes are fugitive emissions considered
in the review of operating permit applications?
Not at all. r ] 2
Applicability determinations. r ] 2
Writing permit conditions. [ ] 32
Other. [ ] 3
Please 11st:
f*nmlianrp with stafP^' ftinitivp
an; <;nurrp rlagsi fi cation
rnnnlianrp with nnacitv
arr.bient standards and allowable PSD increments;
offset requirements for TSP/PM10; compliance with inspection/maintenance
Are nontraditiontl sources covered under the Yes [132 rorans
operating pcrorit program? No f ] 5
If US., do these nontraditional sources include:
. Landfills. I 1 3
Publicly-owned treatment works. [ ] 9
Compost. [ ] 5
Gasoline service stations. [ I 3
Sources typically covered by RCRA (e.g.,
hazardous waste incinerators, waste
co- fired boilers and furnaces). C I 31
. Others [ 1 S
Please list.
Goen burning; air striagers , aeration basins;
1aooons; sewage sludge Incinerators; soil de-
contanination orocesses. _ __
Additional comments on the applicability of the
operating permit requirement.
-------
!Y. Operating Permit Issuance
A. Permit Application
A.I Does your agency use a standard operating Yes ; 137
permit application form? No [ ] i
If YES, please attach a copy of this form.
A.2 Are then source categories that have different Yes r ]?2
application forms? . No i ] 15
If YES, please list and attach copies.
A. 3 Does the individual operating permit application
include a comoliance plan that sets out a scnecule
of measures the permittee will follow to:
Achieve future compliance with the SIP or other Yes [ ] 9
requirement? No [ ] 28
Maintain existing compliance with SIP or other Yes [ ]17
requirement? No [ ] 19
A. 4 Does your operating permit program include general Yes [ ]25
permits covering numerous similar sources without No
requiring individual applications?
A. 5 Do you have a check 11st or policy defining Yes ( ]2Q
application completeness criteria? No [ ]i;
If YES, please summarize or attach a copy.
Usually, a checklist or a policy procedure is
~usea wni en covers all applicable Information
necessary for a source to demonstrate compliance
A.6 Does the permit application inc ude a Yes . 30
certification by a facility official that the No . j 7
information contained 1n the application is
accurate?
-------
B. Notice Requirements
B.I Is not1cง given to tht general public and/or to Yes [ ] 8
interested parties on receipt of tht application No [ ] 15
for an operating permit?
If YES, to whoa 1s notice of receipt of the
application given?
General public. [ ] 7
All adjacent States. [ ] 1
Adjacent States that would be adversely affected
by tht Missions. [ ] 2
c.
Others. [ ]
Please 11st: ,
Local agencies; elected officials; interest
croups; Federal land managers/local governments
: If Nfl, skip to C. Public Review.
B.2 For what sources 1s notice given?
Al sources. * C ] 5
Al and A2 sources. [ ] 5
Sources subject to federal standards
(e.g., NSPS/NESHAP). [ 1 6
A1r toxics sources. C 1 5
. Other. ' C ] 6
Please 11st:
B sources; all sources within states' jurisdiction
10
-------
3.3 Whin 1s notlca of a pending operating permit application
given to tht public?
On receipt of tht optritlng permit application. - i 3
When thi draft permit 1s prepared. r ] 5
Other. ( ] 2
PI east describe:
Preliminary determinations are prepared prior
to giving notice
3.4 How 1s public notice given of tht pending operating
permit application?
Public notice in the local newspaper. r ] 7
Notification by mail to affected parties. r ] 5
General bulletin. [ ] i
Notice printed 1n State register. [ ] Q
Notification to EPA. [ 1 5
Other. [ ] 2
Please describe:
Same as the second (mailing list) and fifth
(EPA) responses given above-. Press Rplpasp
notification hv nail tn intpypgfpH porcnnc
3.5 Who is responsible for Issuing the public notice of
the pending operating permit application?
The State or local agency. j 8
The applicant. ! 1
Other. i 0
PI east describe:
11
-------
C. Public Review
C.I Is a copy of the drift operating permit and Yes [ ] 13
related materials given to the general public No [ 123
and/or to Interested parties prior to Issuance
of the operating percht?
If YES, to whoa Is a copy of the draft operating
permit given?
. General public. M 9
All adjacent States. Hi
Adjacent States that would be adversely
affected by the emissions. !. '- L
. Others.' - - 9
Please 11st:
local -invprnmontc TntPrP^t nrnnn<-'. FPAl
Federal Land Managers: Indian nflY?"1"0 bodies
C.2 Please check the statements below that describe the
public hearing/public comment requirements of the
operating permit program.
. There are no public hearing/public comment ' r
requirements. L J 10
. There are public hearing and comment requirements [ ] 6
for specified source types.
. Public hearings are held on a case-by-case basis. ! lis
. Public hearings are held only if a specified
number of citizens request one.
. Public hearings are held only If an affected party
requests one (e.g., an adjoining property owner).
. Public hearings are held 1f requested by a public
official (e.g. mayor of town in which source is
located).
. Other.
Please describe:
Bv sole disr-rptT"" nf agrnrir '"rprtnr- only for
PSD Sources ...
12
-------
C.3 How frequently are public hearings held for operating
permit applications?
Frequently (over 2SS). ,- ] n
ป j u
Occasionally (10-25X). f j 2
Infrequently (1-10S). r ] 9
Alnjost never (less than IS). ฃ j^
C.4 What 1s the length of the public comment period for
written coomnts on the proposed operating permit?
Case-by-case. r i 7
20 days, unless extended. r } Q
30 days, unless extended. r ]15
Other. [ ] 6
Please describe:
10-15 days for minor sources; 30 days for
PSD sources; 15 days for permit renewals
0. Review Procedure
0.1 Does the operating permit application review Yes [ ]27
procedure Include a completeness determination? Mo f ] 12
If YES, what information is typically lacking in
a permit application that is deternnnea to be
incomplete?
Compliance documentation information; emissions data;
Taci1 It//process descriptions ; control equipment
"parameters; stack data; operating scnecules; application
signature; BACT review; application fee; air toxics information
0.2 Is there a time limit on the agency's review of a Yes [ ] 22
permit application? No [ ] 13
If YES, what is that time limit?
30, 45, 50, 90 or 180 days
0.3 Does the permit automatically issue if your Yes [ ] 7
agency falls to act within the time limits No [ ] 28
specified?
13
-------
D.4 Are there any procedures your agency follows to Yes [ ] 20
expedite the review of pending operating permit No [ ] 15
applications (e.g., model penalt conditions)?
If 1ISป please explain and/or attach copies.
Aaencv checklists or specific guideline procedures
0.5 Does your agency have tht authority to Include Yes [ ] 2s
penrtt conditions* that go beyond underlying SIP No [ ] 7
or other regulatory requirements?
If m, 1s this authority exercised:
Only in response to a Federal request? [ ] ;
On a case-by-case need, as determined through
the permitting process? [ ] 28
Only under other limitations? [ ] 3
Please describe:
Protection of the MAAQS and public health
0.6 How frequently are determinations made on a case-by-
case basis during the permit review process regarding
requirements that are not explicitly required by the
SIP or other regulations such as:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
00-25*) (1-10*) (
-------
0.7 How often during tht oparatlng permit review process
do applicability questions arise that call for an
agency determination to clarify what regulatory
provisions apply (e.g., classification of source
as a paint coating versus paint Impregnating
operation)?
Frequently (over 25X). [ ] 5
Occasionally (10-25%). . [ ] 10
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 14
Almost never (less than IS). [ ] 6
0.3 Are the SIPs and other regulatory requirements on
which the operating permit are based:
Source category specific? [ ] g
Individual source specific? [ ] 3
Both source category and Individual source specific? [ ] 24
Other? C ] 13
Please describe:
Specific to the type of air contaminant, emission
rates, and control device used
0.9 Are special conditions included in operating ves [ ] 20
permits to accommodate batch process operations? No [ ] 14
If YES, please describe.
Conditions for asphalt production; record keeping/reporting
of batcnes/aay; case-oy-case oasis; rated capacity for
"Incinerators; limitations on oatcnes/year
0.10 Does your agency have a policy and/or procedure Yes [ ] 35
for handling confidential information? No [ ] i
If YES, please attach a copy of this policy and/or
procedure.
0.11 Does your agency allow public access to source Yes [ ] 36
files that contain copies of operating permit No [ ] 0
applications, operating permits, inspection
reports, and other information related to the
operating permit?
15
-------
0.12 How often 1s a construction permit Issued as an
operating permit without significant changes?
Frequently (over 25*). r ] 25
Occasionally (10-25X). [ ] 3
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 4
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 4
0.13 Have operating penult requirements and processing Yes [ ] p
ever delayed Issuance of construction permits? No [ j 26
If YES, please describe how frequently this occurs.
Frequently (over 25%). [ ] 2
Occasionally (10-25X). L ] 3
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 4
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 1
E. Permit Issuance
E.I Ooes the agency use the operating permit Yes [ ] 29
process to address existing air quality No [ ] 7
compliance problems?
E.2 Is a permittee required to be in compliance with Yes [ ] -29
all other applicable air quality laws and No r ] 5
regulations before an operating permit can be
issued to that permittee?
F. Appeals Process
F.I Is there an established process whereby the Yes [ ] 36
applicant can appeal the denial or the terms No [ ] 1
and conditions of an operating permit?
If YES, please describe. . u
Appeal to a hearing board In accordance with state
laus
-------
F.2 Is there an established process whereby the yes [ 1 ?>
general public or an interested party can appeal NO r ^
the Issuance, denial, or terns and conditions of
a penalt?
If m, please describe.
Appeal to a hearing board in accordance with state
laws
G. Reporting and Reeordkeeolnq
G.I What types of data on the operation of the
permitted facility are required to be reported
under the operating permit system?
Hours of operation. [ ] 33
Production units completed. r ] 29
Materials used. [ ] 32
Fuel use. '[ ] 34
Emissions estimates [ ] 29
CEMS data. ' [ ] 3.3
Stack test data. [ ] 34
Ambient monitoring data. [ ] 2q
. Other. [ ] 12
Please describe:
Required on a case-by-case basis; start-uo/mal-
funcnon recoras. Freventanve maintenance
records; control equipment parameters
G.2 Are the reported data kept in comouterized files? Yes r ] 13
No [ ] 23
G.3 Can the data reported by the permittee and Yes [ ] 16
maintained by the agency be forwarded to EPA No [ ] 20
in a computer file?
By modem. l ] 10
By mall. [ ] 10
17
-------
V. Permit Modification
A. Reoptn for Causa
A.I Under what circumstances can an operating permit
be reopened for cause?
An operating permit cannot be reopened for cause. [ ] 5
On adoption of an applicable new S/l regulation. [ ] 27
On adoption of an applicable new Federal regulation. [ ] 21
To correct a significant error. [ ] 29
For clarification or to correct minor error [ ] 25
To reflect a name or ownership change. L 1 27
Other. [ ] 5
Please explain:
Noncomoliance with oermit conditions
A.2 How often are operating permits reopened for cause
for any of the aoove reasons?
Frequently (over 25S). C 1 1
Occasionally (10-25X). C 1 7
Infrequently (1-10%). C 1 .14
Almost never (less than 1%). C ] 11
A.3 What 1s the scope of review for permits reopened
for cause?
. Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. C ] 21
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). C ] 3
Entire source. M 11
18
-------
3. Reopen On Permittee's Request
3.1 Under what circumstances can a permit be reopened
based on a request or application by the permittee?
A permit cannot bt reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee. r ] 2
Administrative changes (e.g., namt or ownership [ ] -,
change). "
Inadvtrtant errors in calculations [ ] 39
Process changes retaining ust of tht samt r ] 2g
equipmtnt.
Changes in raw materials stored, combusted, and/or r ] ซ-,
utilized without increased emissions. '
Changes in reporting requirements. [ ]
To incorporate source modifications. [ j -30
To correct a significant error. [ ] 32
To reflect an emissions tradeoff or bubble. [ ] 19
Other. ; [ ] 5
Please explain:
Resoonses were consistent with a few of the
categories listed aoove
3.Z How often art permits reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee?
Frequently (over 25S). ( ] 3
. Occasionally (10-25%). [ ] 3
Infrequently (1-10S). [ ] 22
Never (less than IS). ill
3.3 Can permit conditions be relaxed to be less than Yes [ ] 5
the applicable SIP requirements? No [ ]3C
If YES, please explain:
Regulatory appeal; for a finite pen'o'd while a
permittee' is working towaros compliance
19
-------
8.4 What 1s the scopt of review for penalt reopening on
request or application by permittee?
Directly affected Missions unit(s) only. [ ] 2Q
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ] 6
Entire source. [ ]14
Additional cotntnts for this section:
VI. Permit Renewal
A.I Does your agency Issue operating permits for a Yes [ 129
fixed term? No [ ] 9
A:2 If YES, how long Is the permit renewal cycle? _! _ years
*see Section 3.1, Table 4
A. 3 If the permit renewal cycle differs for different
source types and/or emission units at the same
plant, please explain and give examples below.
In general, the permit renewal cycle was based .on
C8 state responses) such factors as a period nf time
convenient to the regulatory process (fixed renewal period)
ang variable depending on the tvne of
(variaole renewal cycle)
A. 4 What Is the rationale for the length(s) of the
renewal cycle(s)? Are cycles adjusted to balance
work load?
e rnnvpnipnt' t_D__fiiig
regulatory workload. Some states simply stated
that their regulations required this renewal ceriod.
( 22 State responses;
A. 5 Does revision of an existing operating permit Yes [ 112
Initiate a new renewal period? No [ Ji5
Under certain circumstances? C 1 4
Please explain:
Case-bv-case basis _
20
-------
A.6 Can new requirements (such as BACT, NESHAP) be
imposed?:
As they become applicable. [ ] 23
Only at renewal. r ] g
Under other circumstances. ( ] 3
Please explain:
Adoption of new rule; NESHAPS rules are
handled exterior from operating permits
throuqn a compliance plan
A. 7 Can the operating peril t renewal process be used
by the agency as an opportunity to: (check as many
as apply)
Correct errors? ( ] 26
Incorporate newly-adopted S/L requirements? [ ] ?/>
(e.g., 8ACT, RACT}
Incorporate newly-adopted federal requirements? [ ] 9,
(e.g., NSPS, NESHAP) ^
Codify voluntary source reductions? [ ] 20
Develop additional requirements that go
beyond previously adopted S/L or federal
requirements (e.g., CEMS, stack testing,
reporting?
No, all conditions must be specified in rules. [ ] ?
Only In response to federal request. [ ] 2
Case-by-case need determined through
permitting process. L 1 25
- Only 1f source accepts conditions voluntarily. [ ] 3
Other. C I 2
Please describe:
Additional requirements can be Imposed for
recorg keeping, monitoring and testing re-
quirements: settlement agreement*! for
in violation
21
-------
A.a :; tht permit rental process can bt used to develop
additional requirements that go beyond previously
adopted S/L or Federal requirements, are the new
requirements
Federally enforceable? [ ]
State enforceable? [ ] 2
A.9 How frequently are requirements in tht following
areas developed during the renewal process when
they art not explicitly required by tht SIP or
other applicable Federal regulations:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
. (>25X) (10-2SX) (1-10S) (<{%}
Emission limits. [ ] 6 [ ] 4 C ] 7 i 1 n
Operating conditions. []9 []3 Ms M 7
Compliance methods. M 6 * C ] 2 M ฃ C 1.11
. Monitoring. [ ] 3 [ ] 5 C ] 8 Mil
. Reporting. [ ] 7 [ ] 3 M 9 [ ] 3
Recordkaeping. [ ] 6 [ ]4 [ ] 10 [ ] 7
A.10 What 1s the scope of review for penalt renewal?
Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. Mil
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ] i
Entire source. C 1 14
A.11 If the renewal cycle is more than 5 years, what
changes will be needed to accommodate a lesser
time period?
Change in enabling legislation. [ ] 2
Change In rules. C ] 2
Can be accomplished administratively. [ ] 1
-------
*YII. Work Load [NOTE: Rough estimates will suffice.]
A. PIeast fill In the approximate average number of
nปmiit
No.
received annually. Applications/ State
Responses
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources. . .
Operating permits for new or modified minor
sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating perertts for minor sources.
8. Please fill in the approximate average number of
operating permits issued annually.
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources.
Operating permits for minor sources.
Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating permits for minor sources.
C. Please fill In the approximate average number of
permits appealed annually.
Construction permits.
Operating permits for"minor sources.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources.
. Renewed operating permits for major sources.
Renewed operating permits for minor sources.
557
175
445
479
955
31
32
31
26 '
22
Permits/
Year
550
33
88
423
318
1030
Permits/
Year
13
4
1_
1
32_
30
23
22
31
2C_
21
23
23
note:
The numbers given in question A-0 of this section represent the average value
obtained from the number of states which provided data.
23
-------
nO. Of
0. What 1s the average period of time between com- Months/ state
pletlon of an application and Issuance time of Permit Responses
a permit:
Construction permits. 6-2 35_
. Operating permits for new or modified major
sources? ;. 7-3 31_
Operating permits for minor sources. L2_ 28_
. Renewed operating permits for major sources? 4 24_
. Renewed operating permits for minor sources? 2.5 22_
ฃ.1. What ire tht annual resource requirements for the
operating peralt program (Including processing,
Issuance, Inspection, surveillance, stack tests,
and data review)? '421*.
u . . 316.5 28
Major permits
. All permits 16SU_ 31
*ฃ.2. If possible, please ind'cata the resource require-
ments for each of the fci -owing activities.
WOTK_
Major ptraits:
145 7 28
- processing/Issuance. . _
- Inspection/surveillance. 14Lii_ 27_
- stack tests/data review. 62_A_ 27_
*ป,._ .ic; c Q
- otner. =** _L
. Minor permits:
173-5 33
- processing/Issuance.
inspection/surveillance. I1SJ ii
stack tests/data review. -2U ฃ-
ftote: Data for the state of Kansas was not accounted for since their answer was
.given only in numbers of months.
-------
F. What portion of the permits issued:
(Please give percentage estimates.) *Percent *Permits
of Per
Permits Year
Merely implement SIP and/or other Federal
and State requirements as applicable?-29states-78 577
Involve specific decisions to define test
methods, reporting requirements, etc. which
are needed to implement the previously
established SIP requirements? 28States-^?* 124
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements more stringent than the
existing applicable SIP limitations?29 States-18 283
Involve specific decisions to define
alternative but equivalent requirements
to those in the existing SIP? 26 States - 3.2 18_
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements that would relax one or
more applicable SIP requirements
(assuming they would later be revised
. through a SIP revision)? 24 States.-0.33 1
VIII. Fees
A.I What authority does the agency have to impose
fees?
None. [ ] 4
Can impose fees, but not fees based on amount
of emissions. [ ] 15
Can impose emission-based fees. [ 1 14
Can impose new fees without legislative approval. [ ] 5
Can modify Its feซ schedule to reflect increased [ ] 10
costs, but cannot impose new fees without legislative
approval.
Explain limitations:
No limitations on imposing fees but must go
througn ruiemaking process
Note: Data represents an average value of percent of permits and permits per year
based on the number of states which responded to this question.
25
-------
A.2 Are fees collected under the operating permit Yes [ ] 23
program? No [ ] 10
If Yes, please attach a copy of the fee schedule.
A.3 How much are the fees? (e.g., SZS/ton, SSOO/application)
See Section 3.3
Tor a summary of fee schedules - 21 states responded
A.4 What types of fees are collected?
Permit application fees. [ ] 19
Annual operating fees. [ ] 16
Other (e.g., construction, inspection, renewal [ ] 14
waiver request, reinspectlon, surveillance, trade
or allowance, excess Missions, technical assistance,
etc.).
ซ
Please describe:
Annual inspection fees; renewal fees; stack
testing fees; modeling fees
A.5 If an annual operating fee is assessed, how is the
fee established?
Cost of administering permit program. [ I 6
Based on emissions (e.g., tons/yr). [ ] 7
Based on production (e.g., units/year). [ ] 2
. Flat fee. [ 1 5
Based on source category. [ ] 13
. Other. C 1 7
Pleas* describe (e.g., per cost of activity or
service provided, relative risk, size or complexity
of source, output of source, fuel consumption,
capital cost):
Activities associated with the cost of processing
permits; monitoring; record keeping and pemvTt
issuance*, personnel costs fop fr"'n?e travel, ad-
vertising, copying, coin put en
costs
-------
A.6 If an annual operating fet is assessed to covtr
the costs of administering the operating ptrait
program, what costs are Included?
Permit review. .- i 9
Clerical services. ' [ } Q
Inspection. [ ] 8
Monitoring. ( ] 5
Regulation development. r ] 4
Enforcement, r ] 7
Inventorying emissions, r ] 7
Modeling air quality. [ ] 8
Other (e.g., flat fee). [ ] 5
Please describe:
Flat fee; complex formula; assessment based
on source category; separate billing tor CฃH
audits, stack testing, ana ampient monitoring
A.7 Does the agency apportion a percentage of Yes [ ] 5
overall costs, such as administrative overhead- No r ]24
or area-wide monitoring network upkeep, to each
permittee's costs?
If Yes, what costs?
Administrative costs; costs for review of
Tionltorlno data
3. Is there a legislated maxima fee amount or cap? Yes i ]15
NO [ ]16
If YES, please state amount. Range: S25-S50,QQO
C. Are there any source categories that receive Yes ' ] 7
operating permits but are exempted from permit No [ }2l
fees?
If YES, please list.
Government agencies; gasoline service stations;
construction permits; Class b sources; certain
agricultural sources: oublicly owned facilities
27
-------
0.1. How much of the cost of the following Is covered
by annual fees? [Please estimate percent.]
Permit Issuance 42.7 (17 states)
Underlying regulation development 6.7 (10 States)
P . 22 (1C States)
Enforcement _ 1
Otter 14'3 (7states)
0.2. Would an annual fee of S2S per ton per year of Yes [ ] 31
each regulated pollutant (excluding carbon No [ ] i
monoxide) be sufficient to recover the costs of
developing and implementing your permit program.
Including the costs of the underlying regulations?
0.3 Has the agency ever conducted a time and activity Yes [ ] is
analysis to determine the actual costs incurred No i j 17
in operating its permitting program?
If Yes, when?
Variable - some studies done between 198C-1989;
others are still ongoing
Please attach any relevant report.
E.I In relation to the submission of the application, when
is the fee collected?
. At application. . C 1 20
In multiple stages. C J
. At renewal. C ] 9
E.2 Where do the collected fees go? (Choose 1)
General revenue fund. C 1 9
Environmental protection fund [ J 5
. Air program. C ] 11
. Other. ' M 3
/
Please specify:
Permit fee trust fund: snecial nprmit fund:
air tees .niist oe approved by the state legislature
* "lote: Data represents the average percentage of values submitted by states.
28
-------
ฃ.2 If the fees are deposited 1n the General Revenue Fund,
what percent Is returned to the permitting agency?
41.8 (10 States)
E.4 Does your agency have an administrative system Yes [ ] 27
in place to track fees and permit status? No ( ] 2
Additional cements on this section:
State of Pennsylvania is currently promulgating regu-
lations for estaol ishlng a fee schedule ana an aamin-~
istrative system for tracking tees ana permit status.
IX. Enabling Legislation
A. Does your enabling legislation allow you to:
Issue operating permits to all sources that [ ] 34
are covered by a Section 111 or 112 standard
or have 100 TPY emissions after control?
Issue operating permits that are renewable at L 1 23
no more than 5-year intervals?
Assess permit fees adequate to cover all [ ] 12
permit program costs?
Terminate, modify, and reissue permits { ] ฐ2
for cause?
Recover civil penalties of up to $10,000/day, [ ] 21
and appropriate criminal penalties?
Be more stringent than Federal requirements? [ ] 30
Please attach a copy of enabling legislation.
* Note: Data represents the average percentage of values submitted by states.
29
-------
3. Is there any assistance which EPA could provide Yes f ] 13
you in making legislative changes (e.g., model No f j is
provisions)?
Pleas* describe:
EPA administrative assistance In rule promulgation;
"enacting legislation for periodic operating permit
renewal; model provisions
Additional conntnts on enabling legislation:
X. Genera[
A. Are your permits (construction or operating) Yes [ 142
considerea federally enforceable by EPA? No [ ] 2
B. If the proposed Title IV operating perait Yes [ 138
progran were to apply to a specified universe No [ ] 2
of source categories, would you have the
legislative authority to continue to perait
source categories or source sizes riot covered
by Title IV?
C. How does your agency Intend to implement each of
the new technology-based standards anticipated for
promulgation in the future under the Section 112
air toxics provisions of pending CAA proposals?
Incorporation by reference. C ] 22
Rule revision. C 1 21
. Other. [ 1 n
Please specify:
State is undecided; through existing NESHAPS or
hazardous air regulations; implement regulations
Miore stringent than Federal CAA; request for
delegation authority
30
-------
* 0. What types of assistance do you feel you will need
froa EPA in implementing an operating permit program? NO.
(Please prioritize; 1 - highest priority.) .Reprises
Permit tracking/data management systems. [ ] 2 35
Complete application guidance. [ ] 3 35
Model permit conditions for selected source
categories. [ ] 2 37
Training seminars. [ ] 2 40
Other. i
g
Please describe:
Funding; personnel; permit tracking system;
brnad. aenera'
state/local fl
Federal requirements
exibility; State of l
to allow
li no is aoes
not require any help
E. Are your permit data recorded on a computer disk Yes [ ] 21
which is readily transferable to EPA? No [ ] 23
By modem. [ ] s
By mail. [ ]17
F. How are your permit data used?
36
Enforcement purposes. [ ]
Feedback. . [ ]
19
Emission inventory tracking. [ ] 00
do
Other. [ ] 14
Please specify:
SIP revisions; state legislative requirements;
"estimating amount of revenues generated; rule"
development: modeling analysis; air resources
lists; public information; meet 105 Grant
commitments
* Mote: Reflects the average priority submitted by states.
31
-------
*G. What are the major benefits of your permit system?
(Pleas* prioritize; 1 most significant benefit.)
Better enforcement. 40 states C ] 1
Less confusion by regulated community. 33 states [ ] 2
Less litigation. 31 states [ ] 3
Less detailed SIP rules. . 32 states [ ] 3
Fewer source specific SIP revisions. r32 states [ ] 3
. Other benefits. 9 states [ ] 3
Please specify:
Better ambient air quality, ability to exercise
better agency discretion in compliance setting;
acmnlstratlve ease in writing MH revisions; State
of Massachusetts claims no major benefits
H. How did the agency initially fund the development
of its operating permit and fee program?
General revenue fund. [ ]ss
Dedicated fund. [ ] 0
Source prepayment (2-stage permit for affected [ ] i
sources).
Other. [ ] 4
Please explain:
Federal CAA 105 Funds ^^_
Additional comments on these questions:
Mote: Data represents the average priority submitted by states.
32
-------
XI. Recommendations
What rซcoantndatIons/suggestions do you have for consideration
by EPA 1n designing and implenentlng the Title IV operating
permit program?
See Section 4.1 for a summary of responses received from 26 states
33
-------
XII. Additional Questions for Local Agencies
A. PI east check the box which most accurately describes
your permit prograa.
Local agency operates a complete operating permit
prograa.
Local agency issues operating permits for some
sourcts while State issues ptratts for other
sources.
Describe:
Local agency participates in operating permit
review but permit is issued by the State.
Describe last level of review:
Local agency has no involvement in operating [ ]
permit program; however, operating permits are
issued by the State.
Neither . .? State nor the local agency has an [ ]
operating permit prograa.
3. Are any sources required to have operating Yes ( }
permits from both the State and your agency? No [ ]
If Yฃฃ, please describe types of sources
required to have both:
* fiote: This section v;as not applicable to state agencies and only a few States
submitted responses to some of the questions.
34
-------
C. Please check all functions that are performed
by your agency.
All enforcement.
Partial enforcement.
Describe:
All ambient monitoring. [ ]
Partial ambient monitoring. [ ]
Describe:
All emissions Inventory. ( ]
Partial emissions Inventory. [ ]
Describe:
0. Please Indicate any statutory limits on the ability
of your agency to issue operating permits and collect
a fee (check all that apply).
State law prohibits local operating permits. [ ]
Local law prohibits local operating permits. [ ]
State law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ]
Local law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ]
35
-------
XIII. Potential Imnaet of Pending Legislation
A. Clean A1r Act proposals for an operating permit
system currently pending In Congress would require
that EPA promulgate regulations establishing
minimum program requirements for S/L operating
permit programs. Recognizing that the details
of what constitutes an acceptable S/L program are
still uncertain prior to enactment, please provide
a preliminary assessment of your agency's current
status regarding minimum requirements which may
contain 1n part the following elements:
A II IE N
Operating permit application and review [ ]u( ] z[ ] 6[ ] 4
procedures, Including completeness criteria.
Monitoring and reporting requirements. [ ]21[ ] o[ ] 4[ ] -5
Operating -permit fees. [ ]io[ ]15[ ] 6[ ]2
Personnel and funds to administer program. [ ] i[ ]io[ ]8[ 111
Procedures for permit modification. [ ]is[ ] 2[ ] 6[ ft 3
Authority to issue, terminate, revise and [ ]i$[ ] s[ ] j[ ] 2
reissue operating permits, to set emission
limits and to enforce conditions and fees.
Public notice and review procedures. [ ]1@[ ] i[ ] s[ ] 6
Public access to operating permit records. [ ]26[ ] 2[ ] 2[ ] 2
A - adequate
IL inadequate enabling legislation
IR - Inadequate rules
N not certain
8. Other perceived constraints on implementing an
acceptable program under Title IV?
Please explain:
Responses submitted bv 1.3 states: Funding need:
Increase in personnel required; need direct fee
payment to agency; Federal guidance in Implementing
"the Title V. requirements; need to assess the value
of the Title V requirements to the public and
environment
36
-------
Appendix C
Summary of Local Agency Responses from
Agencies with Independent Programs
CH-92-34 C-l
-------
Operating Permit Questionnaire
for
State and Local Air Pollution Control Agencies
I. Agency Information
11. Background
III. Applicability
IV. Operating Permit Issuance
V. Permit Modification
VI. Permit Renewal
VII. Work Load
VIII. Fees
IX. Enabling Legislation
X. General
XI. Recommendations
XII. Additional Questions for Local Control Agencies
XIII. Potential Impact of Pending Legislation
This questionnaire is intended to elicit the best information available on
the design and implementation, of State and local operating permit programs for
air pollutant sources. Although we seek complete answers, Informed estimates
are acceptable, particularly in answering work load questions.
For the purposes of this questionnaire, a "source" is defined as all of
the pollutant-emitting activities that belong to the same industrial grouping,
are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent- properties, and are under
common ownership or control. Further, a "major source" is any source that
emits more than 100 tons per year after control. We prefer that answers to
this questionnaire be consistent with these definitions. If your agency uses
other definitions of "source" or "major source", however, and it is
impractical to convert your answers, please explain below and answer using
your agency's definitions.
When transmitting responses to the questionnaire, it would be appreciated
if a copy of your agency's rules, policies, and guidelines pertaining to the
operating permit program is enclosed. For convenience, you may simply enclose
items that differ from or are in addition to laws and rules contained in the
"State Air Regulations" binders published by the Bureau of National Affairs
(BNA).
-------
Completed questionnaires plus enclosures should be mailed by April li
1990, to: . / H i,
Bill Becker
STAPPA/ALAPCO
444 N. Capitol Street, NH
Washington, DC 20001
-------
I. Aoencv Information
Agency Name: Summary of Responses Provided by Local Agencies
. Address: Analyzed
Nane of Individual Completing Survey:
Telephone Number:
II. Background
A. Does your agency currently have an operating Yes [ J26
permit program for air pollution sources? No [ ] Q
[If your response to Question A 1s NQ,
please answer II.B and then skip to the
the questions In Section X: General on
page 30 and Section XI: Recommendations
on page 33.]
B. If your agency does not have an operating permit
program, is it in the process of developing one?
Yes. [ ]
- In the planning stages. [ ]
- Draft rules prepared. [ ]
- Awaiting decision by governing board/
commission. [ ]
No. C ]
- Constrained legislatively [ ]
- No interest [ 1
Other. [ 1
Please describe:
-------
C. If your response to Question A is YES please
answer the following:
Are operating permits required for sources Yes [ ] 23
having construction permits? NO [ ] 1
Are operating permits for sources having Yes [ ] 21
construction permits plus those not No [ ] 1
previously subject to new source review
(I.e., grandfathered sources)?
D. How extensive has your agency's experience been
with implementing your operating permit program?
Less than 2 years. [ ] o
2 - 5 years. [ ] o
5 - 10 years. [ ] i
More than 10 years. [ ] 22
Please use th.1s space for any additional comments on the
background of your agency's operating permit program.
III. Applicability
A. What types of sources does the operating permit program
apply to?
New and/or modified sources only. [ ] 1
Existing olus new and/or modified' sources. [ ] 25
Other. [ ]
PI east describe:
-------
B. Which pollutants are covered under the operating
permit program? Please check all appHcaole boxes.
. Criteria pollutants (I.e., S02, TSP, PM-10, NO,,
CO, VOC, lead). [ j 25
Section 112 pollutants (e.g., benzene, arsenic) [ ] 19
Toxic pollutants not covered by Section 112. [ ] 13
(Please attach 11st.)
Other pollutants. [ ] g
Please list:
Non reactive hydrocarbons; CFC's; acid gases;
trace metals; nalogenated hydrocarbons
C. What sources are covered by the operating permit
prograa? Please check all applicable boxes.
Sources that emit more than 100 tpy of any
pollutant, after control (Al sources). [ ]25
Sources that emit from 25 tpy through 100 tpy
of any pollutant, after control (A2 sources). [ ]25
Sources that emit 25 tpy or less of any
pollutant, after control (B sources). [ ]26
Section 111 sources [subject to new source
performance standards (NSPS)]. [ ]23
Section 112 sources [subject to national
emissions standard for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP)]. [ ]20
. Other. [ ] 8
Please specify:
Public nuisance sources; sources of toxic
emitters not covered by NESHAPS; minor sources
not covered by Federal requirements
-------
0. Remitting of these sources 1s the typical mechanism
by which the following are Implemented. Please
check all applicable boxes.
State Implementation Plan (SIP). [ ]21
. CAA Section 111. [ ] 21
CAA Section 112. [ ] 20
S/L air toxics requirements. [ ]17
Other. [ ] 5
Please specify:
District adopted rules; PSD rules; nuisance
visible emissions standards; attainment
pollutant emissions standards
E.I Are there sources that are exempted from the Yes [ ] 24
operating permit requirement? No [ ]
E.2 On what basis are sources exempted from the
operating permit requirement?
* V
Low size or production capacity. [ ] 20
De minimls emission level. [ ]'i4
Other. [ ] 9
Please describe:
Sources with difficulty in administering
control technology; non-criteria source types
not regulated under air toxics program
-------
E.3 What types of sources are exempted front the
operating permit requirement?
Woodstoves. j- j _
Asbestos demolition/renovations. [ ] 12
Radionuclide sources. [ ] ^
Residential boilers/furnaces. [ ] 2o
A1r conditioning or comfort ventilation systems. [ ] 2o
Nonstatlonary internal combustion engines. [ ] is
Other. [ ] 12
Please specify and/or attach 11st:
See Section 6.4, Table 7
F.I Can your agency cover multiple emission points Yes [ ] 20
located within the same source under a single No [ ] 5
operating permit?
F.2 If facilities are permitted on an emissions unit
basis, are data on permitted emissions aggregated
on a plantwide basis?
For emissions inventory purposes? Yes [ ] 24
No [ ]
For reporting compliance status? Yes [ ] 13
No [ ] 5
Other. Yes [ ] 2
NO [ ]
Please explain:
Situation is .quite variable; cumulative
emission increases are subject to MSR
-------
For what purposes are fugitive emissions considered
in the review of operating permit applications?
Not at all. [jg
Applicability determinations. [ ]2i
Writing permit conditions. [ ]26
Other. [ ] 7
Please list:
fiSR requirements; case-by-case basis; included
as part of total plant emissions; separate state
fugitive dust program requirements; application
fee schedule; source compliance
Are nontradltlonal sources covered under the Yes [ ]23
operating permit program? No [ ] 3
If YES. do these nontradltlonal sources Include:
Landfills. [ ]n
Publicly-owned treatment works. [ ]12
Compost. [ ] 2
Gasoline service stations. [
Sources typically covered by RCRA (e.g.,
hazardous waste Incinerators, waste
co-fired boilers and furnaces). [ ]2i
Others [ ] 8
Please 11st.
Soil and water decontamination processes; privately
"owned treatment facilities: aeration basins
Additional comments on the applicability of the
operating permit requirement.
8
-------
IV. Operating Permit Issuance
A. Permit Application
A.I Does your agency use a standard operating Yes [ ]24
permit application form? No [ ] 2
If Iฃii please attach a copy of this form.
A.2 Are there source categories that have different Yes [ ]i3
application forms? No [ ]is
If YES, please list and attach copies.
There were application form additions for a
'variety of source types ~
A.3 Does the individual operating permit application
include a compliance plan that sets out a schedule
of measures the permittee will follow to:
Achieve future compliance with the SIP or other Yes [ ] 7
requirement? No [ ]18
Maintain existing compliance with SIP or other Yes [ ]13
requirement? No [ ]12
A.4 Does your operating permit program include general Yes [ ]12
permits covering numerous similar sources without No [ ] 14
requiring individual applications?
A.5 Do you have a check 11st or policy defining Yes [ ] 15
application completeness criteria? No f ] 10
If YES, please summarize or attach a copy.
Usually a checklist of policy procedures i's used
A.6 Does the permit application include a Yes [ ] 21
certification by a facility official that the No [ ] 5
information contained in the application is
accurate?
-------
B. Notice Requirements
B.I Is notice given to the general public and/or to Yes [ ] 3
Interested parties on receipt of the application No [ jie
for an operating penalt?
If YES, to whom 1s notice of receipt of the
application given?
General public. [ ] 7
All adjacent States. [ ] o
Adjacent States that would be adversely affected
by the eohsslons. [ ] Q
Others. [ ] 4
Please 11st:
State Agency; EPA; all agencies located in
the A.qTc.R.; Federal land managers and
ad.iacent air districts (NSR)
If NQ, skip to C. Public Review.
B.2 For what sources is notice given?
Al sources. : [ ] 4
Al and A2 sources. [ ] 4
Sources subject to federal standards
(e.g., NSPS/NESHAP). ( ] 1
A1r toxics sources. [ ] 2
. Other. ' [ ] 4
Please 11st:
Controversial sources; RCRA sources; all
sources within 1UUU feet of a school or of
significant public concern/interest
10
-------
8.3 When 1s notice of a pending operating permit application
given to the public?
On receipt of the operating permit application. [ ] 2
When the draft permit 1s prepared. [ ] Q
Other. [ ] i
Please describe:
Once a preliminary decision to authorize
construction has been prepared
B.4 How 1s public notice given of the pending operating
permit application?
Public notice in the local newspaper. [ ] 8
Notification by mail to affected parties. [ ] 6
General bulletin. [ ] 2
Notice printed 1n State register. [ ] i
Notification to EPA. [ ] 5
. Other. [ ] 0
Please describe:
8.5 Who is responsible for Issuing the public notice of
the pending operating permit application?
The State or local agency. I 1 9
The applicant. '. ! 3
. Other. i ! o
Please describe:
11
-------
C. Public Review
C.I Is a copy of the draft operating permit and Yes [ ]13
related materials given to the general public No [ ]12
and/or to interested parties prior to Issuance
of the operating permit?
If XฃS, to whom is a copy of the draft operating
permit given?
General public. [ ] 11
All adjacent States. [ ] o
Adjacent States that would be adversely
affected by the emissions. [ ] 2
Others.' [ ] Q
Please 11st:
State agencies; EPA; adjacent air districts and
"counties; specific mailing lists: Federal land
managers; ma.ior sources only
C.2 Please check the statements below that describe the
public hearing/public comment requirements of the
operating permit program.
There are no public hearing/public comment
requirements. [ ] 3
There are public hearing and comment requirements [ ]11
for specified source types.
Public hearings are held on a case-by-case basis. ; ]16
Public hearings are held only if a specified
number of citizens request one. [ ] 3
Public hearings are held only if an affected party
requests one (e.g., an adjoining property owner). ! 3
Public hearings are held if requested by a public ( } i
official (e.g. mayor of town in which source is
located).
Other. : 1 5
Please describe:
Public comment period held onlv for large
sources; public hearings arp hplH nnlv fnr
permit appeals or if application Is denied
12
-------
C.3 How frequently are public hearings held for operating
permit applications?
Frequently (over 25%). [ -, i
Occasionally (10-25%). [ j i
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 5
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 15
C.4 What is the length of the public comment period for
written comments on the proposed operating permit?
Case-by-case. [ ] 3
20 days, unless extended. [ ] i
30 days, unless extended. [ ] 13
Other. [ ] 3
Please describe:
30 days when applicable; 10 days
0. Review Procedure
0.1 Ooes the operating permit application review Yes [ ] 22
procedure include a completeness determination? No [ ] 4
If YES, what information is typically lacking in
a permit application that is determined to be
incomplete?
Emissions data; certain engineering parameters;
equipment description and process rate; corporate
signature; application fee; BACT/LAER information;
health risk data; rule compliance analysis
0.2 Is there a time limit on the agency's review of a Yes [ ]24
permit application? No [ ] 2
If YES, what Is that time limit?
30, 60, 90, 180 days up to one year
0.3 Does the permit automatically issue if your Yes [ ] 7
agency fails to act within the time limits No [ ]17
specified?
13
-------
D.4 Are there any procedures ycur agency follows to Yes [ ] 9
expedite the review of pending operating permit No [ ]17
applications (e.g., model peralt conditions)?
If YES, please explain and/or attach copies.
. Checklists or agency procedures
0.5 Does your agency have the authority to Include Yes [ ] 22
peralt conditions: that go beyond underlying SIP No [ ] 4
or other regulatory requirements?
If YES. 1s this authority exercised:
Only in response to a Federal request? [ ] i
On a case-by-case need, as determined through
the permitting process? [ ] 21
Only under other limitations? [ ]
Please describe:
0.6 How frequently are determinations made on a case-by-
case basis during the permit review process regarding
requirements that are not explicitly required by the
SIP or other regulations such as:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
(>25X) (10-25X) (l
Emission limits. [ ] 12 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 4
Operating conditions. [ ] 12 [ ] 6 [ ] 2 [ ] 3
Compliance methods. C ] 4 [ ] 3 M& [ ] 7
Monitoring. [ ] 5 [ ] 4 [ ] 7 [ ] 8
Reporting. [ ] 11 [ ] 5 [ ] 5 [ ] 3
Recordkeeping. [ ] 14 [ ] 4 [ ] 2 [ ] 4
14
-------
0.7 How often during the operating permit review process
do applicability questions arise that call for an
agency determination to clarify what regulatory
provisions apply (e.g., classification of source
as a paint coating versus paint Impregnating
operation)?
Frequently (over 25%). [ ] 5
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ] g
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 8
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 4
0.8 Are the SIPs and other regulatory requirements on
which the operating permit are based:
Source category specific? [ ] a
ซ Individual source specific? [ ] Q
Both source category and Individual source specific? [ Jis
Other? [ ] 2
Please describe:
Air contaminant specific and/or generic
^e.g. opacity, nuisance, grain loading)
0.9 Are special conditions included in operating Yes [ hs
permits to accommodate batch process operations? No [ J13
If YES, please describe.
Batch process parameters; throughput parameters;
"depends on materials used, hours of operation and
emission limits; test/compliance determinations;
case-by-case basis
0.10 Does your agency have a policy and/or procedure Yes [ ] 22
for handling confidential information? No [ 3 4
If YES, please attach a copy of this policy and/or
procedure.
D.1I Does your agency allow public access to source Yes [ ] 24
files that contain copies of operating permit No [ ] 2
applications, operating permits, inspection
reports, and other information related to the
operating permit?
15
-------
0.12 How often 1s a construction permit Issued as an
operating permit without significant changes?
Frequently (over 25%). [ ]25
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ] o
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] i
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 0
0.13 Have operating permit requirements and processing Yes [ ] 13
ever delayed Issuance of construction permits? No [ ] 9
If YฃL, please describe how frequently this occurs.
Frequently (over 25%). [ ] 5
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ] 5
Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 5
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 0
E. Permit Issuance
E.I Does the agency use the operating permit Yes [ ] 22
process to address existing air quality No [ j 4
compliance problems?
E.2 Is a permittee required to be in compliance with Yes [ ] 24
all other applicable air quality laws and No [ ] 2
regulations before an operating permit can be
issued to that permittee?
F. Appeals Process
F.I Is there an established process whereby the Yes [ ] 24
applicant can appeal the denial or the terms No [ ] 2
and conditions of an operating permit?
If 1ฃฃ, please describe.
Appeals are made to a hearing board.in accordance
with local/state laws
16
-------
F.2 Is there an established process whereby the Yes [ ]20
general public or an Interested party can appeal No [ ] 4
the Issuance, denial, or terms and conditions of
a permit?
If IEI, please describe.
Appeals are made to hearing boards in accordance
with local/state laws
G. Reporting and Recordkeeolnq
G.I What types of data on the operation of the
permitted facility are required to be reported
under the operating permit system?
Hours of operation. [ ]25
Production units completed. [ ]19
Materials used. [ ]24
Fuel use. t ]26
Emissions estimates [ J21
CEMS data. " [ ]21
Stack test data. [ ]26
Ambient monitoring data. [ ]10
Other. [ ] 3
Please describe:
Malfunction and maintenance data; data used
to access proper operation of the control
system
G.2 Are the reported data kept in computerized files? Yes [ ] 9
No [ ]17
G.3 Can the data reported by the permittee and Yes [ ]14
maintained by the agency be forwarded to EPA No [ Jll
In a computer file?
By modem. [ ] 4
. By mall. [ 312
17
-------
V. Permit Modification
A. Reopen for Cause
A.I Under what circumstances can an operating permit
be reopened for cause?
An operating permit cannot be reopened for cause. [ ] Q
On adoption of an applicable new S/L regulation. [ ] 20
On adoption of an applicable new Federal regulation. [ ] 15
To correct a significant error. C ] 18
For clarification or to correct minor error [ ] 19
To reflect a name or ownership change. [ ] 20
Other. [ ] 3
: Please explain:
Air quality problems involving public nuisance
sources: operating permits reopened when de-
termined necessary by the agency
A.2 How often are operating permits reopened for cause
for any of the above reasons?
ซ Frequently (over 25%). [ ] 1
. Occasionally (10-25X). [ ] G
. Infrequently (1-10%). [ ] 12
Almost never (less than 1%). [ ] 5
A. 3 What 1s the scope of review for permits reopened
for cause?
Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. [ ] 20
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ] 3
Entire source. [ ] 7
-------
8. Reopen On Permittee's Request
B.I Under what circumstances can a permit be reopened
based on a request or application by the permittee?
A permit cannot be reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee. [ ] i
Administrative changes (e.g., name or ownership [ ]25
change).
Inadvertant errors 1n calculations [ ]2i
Process changes retaining use of the same [ ]22
equipment.
Changes in raw materials stored, combusted, and/or [ ] 2i
utilized without increased emissions.
Changes in reporting requirements. [ ]IG
To incorporate source modifications. [ ]22
To correct a significant error. [ ]ig
To reflect an emissions tradeoff or bubble. [ ]is
Other. . [ ] i
Please explain:
Uhen determined necessary by the agency
8.2 How often are permits reopened based on a request
or application by the permittee?
Frequently (over 25%). [ ] 2
Occasionally (10-25%). [ ] 2
Infrequently (1-10%). Hi?
Never (less than 1%). [ ] 4
B.3 Can permit conditions be relaxed to be less than Yes [ ] 1
the applicable SIP requirements? No [ ]25
If YES, please explain:
No infromation was given
19
-------
B.4 What is the scope of review for permit reopening on
request or application jy permittee?
ซ Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. [ ]is
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ] 4
Entire source. [ ] 3
Additional comments for this section:
VI. Permit Renewal
A.I Does your agency issue operating permits for a Yes [ ]20
fixed term? No [ ] 6
A. 2 If Yฃฃ, how long is the permit renewal cycle? * years
ซ ซ rซ *i. .i* i i jiฃ* t ^iec * sฃe Section 7.1, Table 8
A. 3 If the permit renewal cycle differs for different
source types and/or emission units at the same
plant, please explain and give examples below.
Permit cycle is based on source category for a
"variable renewal cycle (1 local agency response"!
A.4 What is the rationale for the length(s) of the
renewal cycle(s)? Are cycles adjusted to balance
work load?
Short term cycles help ensure compliance match
budgeting period and balance work load US local
"agency responses)
A.5 Does revision of an existing operating permit Yes [ ] 4
initiate a new renewal period? No [ ]12
Under certain circumstances? [ ] 2
Please explain:
No explanation given by either agency
20
-------
A.6 Can new requirements (such as BACT, NESHAP) be
Imposed?:
As they become applicable. [ ] 21
Only at renewal. [ ] 3
Under other circumstances. [ ] 4
Please explain:
New requirements can be imposed if: a source
is modified; by discretion of the agency di-
rector or local governing board; jf a revision
requires a new construction permit
A.7 Can the operating penalt renewal process be used
by the agency as an opportunity to: (check as many
as apply)
Correct errors? [ ] 19
Incorporate newly-adopted S/L requirements? [ j 15
(e.g., BACT, RACTJ
Incorporate newly-adopted federal requirements? [ ] 15
(e.g., NSPS, NESHAP)
Codify voluntary source reductions? [ ] 10
Develop additional requirements that go
beyond previously adopted S/L or federal
requirements (e.g., CEMS, stack testing,
reporting?
No, all conditions must be specified in rules. [ ] 2
Only in response to federal request. [ ] i
Case-by-case need determined through
permitting process. [ 1 14
Only 1f source accepts conditions voluntarily. [ ] 3
Other. [ ] 2
Please describe:
Increase enforceabilitv
21
-------
A.S If the permit renewal process can be used to develop
additional requirements that go beyond previously
adopted S/L or Federal requirements, are the new
requirements
Federally enforceable? [ ] 4
State enforceable? [ ] g
A.9 How frequently are requirements in the following
areas developed during the renewal process when
they are not explicitly required by the SIP or
other applicable Federal regulations:
Almost
Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never
(>25X) (10-25X) (l
Emission limits. [ ] 2 Ml [ ]4 [ ]io
Operating conditions. [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 7 [ ] 7
Compliance methods. [ ] 2 ' []l [ ] 2 [ ] 9
Monitoring. [ ] 3 [ ] 0 [ ] 7 [ ] 9
Reporting. [ ] 3 [ ] 1 [ ] S [ ] 8
Recordkeeping. [ ] 3 [ ] 1 [ ] 7 [ ] 8
A.10 Whit 1s the scope of review for permit renewal?
Directly affected emissions unit(s) only. ( ] 5
All associated emissions units (e.g., entire
finishing room at furniture plant). [ ] 2
Entire source. [ ]12
A.11 If the renewal cycle is more than 5 years, what .
changes will be needed to accommodate a lesser
time period?
Change in enabling legislation. [ ] o
Change in rules. Ml
Can be accomplished administratively. [ ] 3
22
-------
VII. Work Load [NOTE: Rough estimates will suffice.]
A. Pleas* fill In the approximate average number of
Qnซratlno nenait applications received annually. AQpUcatlons/
Construction permits. 34 agencies 428
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources. . . 25 agencies -1L
Operating permits for new or modified minor
sources. 25 agencies 310
Renewed operating permits for major sourฃesa.ggncies 133
Renewed operating permits for minor sounฃsa.genc'es 2108
B. Please fill in the approximate average number of
operating permits Issued annually. Permits/
Construction permits. 25 agencies 589
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources. Z4 agencies 35
Operating permits for minor sources. 24 agencies 469
m * '+. * 24 agencies ,
Renewed operating permits for major sources. 132
Renewed operating permits for minor sour2etsa.C)ei''cies 2273
C. Please fill 1n the approximate average number of
permits appealed annually. Perm-its/
Year
Construction permits. 25 agencies ?i
Operating permits for' minor sources. 26 agencies _4 _
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources. 26 agencies T
Renewed operating permits for major sour&sa.gencies _Q _
25 agencies
Renewed operating permits for minor sources. l
ote: The numbers given in Questions A-D of this section represent the average
value obtained from the number of local agencies which provided data.
23
-------
D. What 1s the average period of tlmt between com-
pletlon of an application and Issuance time of
a permit:
Construction permits.
Operating permits for new or modified major
sources?
Operating pemlts for minor sources.
. Renewed operating perartts for major sources?
. Renewed operating permits for minor sources?
E.I. Wilt are the annual resource requirements for the
operating permit program (Including processing,
Issuance, Inspection, surveillance, stack tests,
and data review)?
Major permits
All permits
E.2. If possible, please Indicate the resource require-
Bents for each of the following activities.
Major permits:
processing/Issuance.
Inspection/surveillance.
- stack tests/data review.
- other.
Minor permits:
processing/Issuance.
- Inspection/surveillance.
- stack tests/data review.
Months/ No. f
parmit Responses
11
2ฃ
24
11
21
Work
OS.4
V
Work
95.2
67.4
26.6
12.2
..I--5,
107.47
48.2
2!
24
20
19
24
-------
F. What portion of the permits Issued:
(PIeast give percentage estimates.)
* Percent
of
Permits
*Perm1ts
Per No...
Year Agendies
Merely Implement SIP and/or other Federal
and State requirements as applicable? '52.5
Involve specific decisions to define test
methods, reporting requirements, etc. which
are needed to Implement the previously
established SIP requirements? 23.9
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements more stringent than the
existing applicable SIP limitations? 19.6
Involve specific decisions to define
alternative but equivalent requirements
to those in the existing SIP? 8.0
Involve specific decisions to define
requirements that would relax one or
more applicable SIP requirements
(assuming they would later be revised
through a SIP revision)? .2
165
22
11.9
22
20
21
20
19
VIII. Fees
A.I What authority does the agency have to impose
fees?
None. [ ] 2
Can impose fees, but not fees based on amount
of emissions. [ ]n
Can impose emission-based fees. [Ill
Can impose new fees without legislative approval. [ ] 5
Can modify its fee schedule to reflect Increased [ ] 7
costst but cannot impose new fees without legislative
approval.
Explain limitations:
No specific information was given
* Note: Data represents an average value of percent of permits and permits per year
based on the number of l:QcaT;a:q^f.m?^fa-cti-;. res ponded to this survey
question.
25
-------
A.2 Are fees collected under the operating permit Yes [ ] 24
program? No [ ] 2
If lฃIป please attach a copy of the fee schedule.
A.3 How much are the fp*s? (e.g., S25/ton, SSOO/application)
See Section 7.3 fo summary of -fee schedules
17 local agencies responded
A. 4 What types of fees are collected?
Permit application fees. [ ]22
Annual operating fees. [ ]21
Other (e.g., construction. Inspection, renewal [ jig
waiver request, reinspection, surveillance, trade
or allowance, excess emissions, technical assistance,
etc.).
Please describe:
Construction permits; stack testing; public
notice/comment tees; asbestos removal tees;
reporting/monitoring; inspection fees; modeling
fees
A.5 If an annual operating fee is assessed, how is the
fee established?
Cost of administering permit program. [ }13
Based on emissions (e.g., tons/yr). [ ]13
Based on production (e.g., units/year). [ ] 5
Flat fee. [ ] 9
Based on source category. [ ]16
jther. [ 1 5
Please describe (e.g., per cost of activity or
service provided, relative risk, size or complexity
of source, output of source, fuel consumption,
capital cost):
Graduated fees which are based on source size:
fees based on maximum process weight and con-
sumption potential; fees based on inspection
of actual emissions, numbers of sources In-
spected and appeals/variances granted.
-------
A.6 If an annual operating fee 1s assessed to cover
the costs of administering the operating penalt
program, what costs are Included?
Permit review. [ ]H
Clerical services. ' [ ]n
Inspection. [ ]12
Monitoring. [ ]n
Regulation development. [ ] 9
Enforcement. [ ]12
Inventorying emissions. [ ]12
Modeling air quality. [ ] g
Other (e.g., Hat fee). [ ] 7
Please describe:
Administration of emission fees: ambient
monitoring network costs: administrative
nvprhpari
A.7 Does the agency apportion a percentage of Yes [ ]io
overall costs, such as administrative overhead- No Mil
or area-wide monitoring network upkeep, to each
permittee's costs?
If Yes, what costs?
Ambient monitoring and administrative and
overhead costs
8. Is there a legislated maximum fee amount or cap? Yes [ ]10
No [ ]n
If 1ES, please state amount. Range: SlOO/permit-
$15,750
C. Are there any source categories that receive Yes [ ] 6
operating permits but are exempted from permit No [hs
fees?
If YฃS, please 11st.
Local .State, and Federal Government facilities;
agricultural burning operations
27
-------
*0.1. How much of the cost of the following 1s covered
by annual fees? [Please estimate percent.]
Permit Issuance 73.6 (19 local agencies)
Underlying regulation development 42.1 (17 local agencies)
Enforcement 56.1 (18 local agencies)
Other 24.7 (6 local agencies)
0.2. Would an annual fee of $25 per ton per year of Yes [ ]12
each regulated pollutant (excluding carbon No [ ] 8
monoxide) be sufficient to recover the costs of
developing and implementing your permit program,
including the costs of the underlying regulations?
0.3 Has the agency ever conducted a time and activity Yes [ ]10
analysis to determine the actual costs incurred No [ ]13
in operating its permitting program?
If Yes, when?
Variable - between late 1970's-1990
Please attach any relevant report.
E.I In relation to the submission of the application, when
is the fee collected?
At application. [ ]20
In multiple stages. [ ] 6
At renewal. [ ] S
E.2 Where do the collected fees go? (Choose 1)
General revenue fund. [Ill
Environmental protection fund [ ] 1
A1r program. [ ]13
Other. C 1 0
Please specify:
* Mote: Data represents the average percentage of values submitted by local
agencies.
28
-------
*E.3 If the fees are deposited 1n the General Revenue Fund,
what percent 1s returned to the permitting agency?
70 (10 local agencies)
E.4 Does your agency have an administrative system Yes [ ]20
In place to track fees and permit status? No [ ] 3
Additional comments on this section:
IX. Enabling Legislation
A. Does your enabling legislation allow you to:
Issue operating permits to all sources that [ ]22
are covered by a Section 111 or 112 standard
or have 100 TRY emissions after control?
Issue operating permits that are renewable at [ ]14
no more than 5-year intervals?
Assess permit fees adequate to cover all [ ]14
permit program costs?
Terminate, modify, and reissue permits [ ]2i
for cause?
Recover civil penalties of up to $10,000/day, [ ]20
and appropriate criminal penalties?
Be more stringent than Federal requirements? [ ]26'
Please attach a copy of enabling legislation.
* Note: Data represents the average percentage of values submitted by local
agencies.
-------
B. Is there any assistance which EPA could provide Yes [ ] 5
you in making legislative changes (e.g., model No [ 115
provisions)?
Please describe:
Model provisions; state laws must allow local
agencies to collect permit fees
Additional comments on enabling legislation:
X. General
A. Are your permits (construction or operating) Yes [ ]21
considered federally enforceable by EPA? No [ ] l
B. If the proposed Title IV operating permit Yes [ ]20
prograa were to apply to a specified universe No [ ] 1
of source categories, would you have the
legislative authority to continue to permit
source categories or source sizes hot covered
by Title IV?
C. How does your agency intend to implement each of
the new technology-based standards anticipated for
promulgation in the future under the Section 112
air toxics provisions of pending CAA proposals?
Incorporation by reference. [ ]ll
ซ Rule revision. l ]13
.. Other. [ ] 4
Please specify:
No decision had been made as of date of survey
submlttal; state delegation to local agency;
standards may already be covered under states'
air toxics identification and control program
30
-------
0. What types of assistance do you feel you will need
from EPA in implementing an operating permit program?
No.
(Please prioritize; 1 - highest priority.) Responses
Permit tracking/data management systems. [ ] 3 IQ_
Complete application guidance. [ ]4 n
Model permit condltl-ons for selected source
categories. . [ ] 2 11
Training seminars. [ I 3 II
Other. [ ] 2 7
Please describe:
Funding; fewer time consuming, non-productive
requirements; additional assistance more im-
"portant than those listed (unspecified); several
agencies stated that assistance was not necessary
E. Are your permit data recorded on a computer disk Yes [ ] 8
which is readily transferable to EPA? Mo [ j 18
By modem. [ ] 7
By mail. [ ] 6
F. How are your permit data used?
Enforcement purposes. [ ] 24
Feedback. . [ ] 11
Emission Inventory tracking. [ ] 20
Other. [ ] 7
Please specify:
Data used for surveys/questionnaires; identify
cumulative emissions increases under NSR: study
"emissions by source category/type; to determine
annual fees for sources
*Note: Reflects the average priority submitted by local agencies.
31
-------
What are the major benefits of your permit system?
(PIeast prioritize; 1 - most significant benefit.) No. of
Responses
Better enforcement. [ ] 1 25
Less confusion by regulated community. [ ] 2 20
Less litigation. [ ] 2 19
Less detailed SIP rules. [ ] 3 13
Fewer source specific SIP revisions. [ ] 3 15
Other benefits. [ ] 2 _6
Please specify:
H. How did the agency initially fund the development
of Its operating permit and fee program?
ป
General revenue fund. [ ]20
Dedicated fund. [ ] l
Source prepayment (2-stage permit for affected [ ] 5
sources).
Other. [ ] 6
Please explain:
CAA 105 Funds; state subsidizes program;
property taxes "~~~"~"""~"""~""^H^
Additional comments on these questions:
* Note: Data represents the average priority submitted by local agencies
32
-------
XI. Recommendations
What recommendations/suggestions do you have for consideration
by EPA 1n designing and implementing the Title IV operating
permit program?
10 local agencies responded
See Section 8.1 for a summary of responses.
33
-------
XII. Additional Questions for Local Agencies
A. PI east check the box which most accurately describes
your permit program.
Local agency operates a complete operating permit [ ]
program.
Local agency Issues operating permits for some [ ]
sources while State issues permits for other
sources.
Describe:
Local agency participates in operating permit [ ] c
review but permit is issued by the State.
Describe last level of review:
Local agency has no involvement in operating [ ] Q
permit program; however, operating permits are
issued by the State.
Neither the State nor the local agency has an [ ] 0
operating permit program.
B. Are any sources required to have operating Yes [ ] 4
permits from both the State and your agency? No [ ] 21
If YES, please describe types of sources
required to have both:
34
-------
C. PI east chick all functions that are performed
by your agency.
All enforcement. [ ]24
Partial enforcement. [ ] 2
Describe:
All anblent monitoring. [ ]2i
Partial ambient monitoring. [ ] 4
Describe:
All emissions Inventory. [ ]i?
Partial emissions Inventory. [ ] 9
Describe:
D. Please Indicate any statutory limits on the ability
of your agency to Issue operating permits and collect
a fee (check all that apply).
State law prohibits local operating permits. [ ] 0
Local law prohibits local operating permits. [ ] 0
State law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ] l
Local law prohibits collecting permit fees. [ ] l
35
-------
XIII. Potential Impact of Pending Legislation
A. Clean A1r Act proposals for an operating permit
system currently pending In Congress would require
that EPA promulgate regulations establishing
minimum program requirements for S/L operating
permit programs. Recognizing that the details
of what constitutes an acceptable S/L program are
still uncertain prior to enactment, please provide
a preliminary assessment of your agency's current
status regarding minimum requirements which may
contain 1n part the following elements:
A IL IS N
Operating permit application and review [ J2i[ ]4 [ h [ ]i
procedures, including completeness criteria.
Monitoring and reporting requirements. [ ]23[ ]2 [ ]l [ ]i
Operating-permit fees. [ ]is[ ]4 [ ]2 [ ]7
; Personnel and funds to administer program. [ ]11[ ]6 [ ]3 [ ]9
Procedures for permit modification. [ ]22[ ]5 [ ]2 [ ]o
Authority to issue, terminate, revise and [ ]zc[ ]6 [ ]3 C ]2
reissue operating permits, to set emission
limits and to enforce conditions and fees.
*
Public notice and review procedures. [ ]22C ]2 [ ]3 [ ]4
Public access to operating permit records. [ ]22[ ]l [ JO [ ]l
A adequate
IL - inadequate enabling legislation
IR ป inadequate rules
N not certain
B. Other perceived constraints on implementing an
acceptable program under Title IV?
Please explain:
Funding constraints; start-up limitations:
adequately trained staff
2 aaencies provided responses
36
------- |