Program Review
of
NDEE's Air Permitting Programs
Conducted: June - July and September 2022
U.S. EPA, Region 7
Air Permitting and Standards Branch
Air and Radiation Division
-------
Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy Program Review Report Contents
Contents
A. INTRODUCTION 1
B. SUMMARY of FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS 2
C. CATEGORIZED COMMENTS 4
1. General 4
a. Staffing 4
b. Incorporation by Reference: 4
c. Other General Observations 5
2. Construction Permitting 6
a. Assuring Healthy Air Quality 6
b. Other Construction Permitting Observations 7
c. Variances 8
3. NSPS / NESHAP 8
4. Operating Permits 8
a. Title V Fees 8
b. Other Title V Observations 11
ATTACHMENT A: List of Sources Reviewed 13
ATTACHMENT B: Completed NSR Questionnaire and Appendix A 20
ATTACHMENT C: Completed Title V Questionnaire 75
ATTACHMENT D: Fee Attachment 170
ATTACHMENT E: Entrance Meeting Attendees June 8, 2022 173
ATTACHMENT F: File Review Exit Meeting Attendees August 10, 2022 174
ATTACHMENT G: NDEE's Response Letter Regarding the Draft Report 175
-------
NDEE
AIR PERMITTING PROGRAMS
PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
A. INTRODUCTION
The comprehensive review of Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy's (NDEE's) air
permitting programs was part of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 7's efforts
to fulfill the EPA's oversight responsibility to ensure adequate implementation of the Clean Air
Act. The overall scope of this review included assessment of the state agency's performance re-
garding: 1) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)/New Source Review (NSR) construc-
tion permitting, 2) Title V operating permitting, 3) synthetic minor permitting [construction
and/or operating], 4) New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Stand-
ards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) determinations, 5) the establishment of enforceable
permit conditions and 6) the use of Title V operating permit fees.
The review was initiated by a letter to the department dated April 25, 2022, with a request for
separate lists of state NSR construction and Class II operating permits issued over the previous
three years and a request that questionnaires be completed and returned to the regional office
prior to the remote site review of files. We also requested that the NDEE fill out Attachment C
from the March 27, 2018 guidance "Program and Fee Evaluation Strategy and Guidance for 40
CFR Part 70." The decision was made to conduct the program review from remote work loca-
tions due to the on-going COVID 19 pandemic. Therefore, this review was accomplished using
video meetings and reviewing electronic versions of files.
The program review entrance meeting was held virtually on June 8, 2022. Attachment E lists the
attendees of the meeting. A file review exit meeting was held virtually on August 10, 2022. At
this meeting we discussed our initial findings and discussed the next steps for the review. Attach-
ment F list the attendees of the exit meeting.
The following Region 7 staff participated in the review of files: Ward Burns, Bob Cheever, Keith
Johnson, David Peter, Pat Scott, and Bob Webber. A total of 92 sources and 133 permit files
were reviewed regarding the above-mentioned actions (see Appendix A).
The review team appreciated the assistance of the NDEE staff in providing records and financial
information, and answering questions related to the program review.
1
-------
B. SUMMARY of FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS
The NDEE runs adequate construction and operating permit programs. In general, we found that
all the projects we reviewed completed the proper level of permitting with the significant area of
concern for permitting being, the use of simply standards incorporation by reference in both con-
struction and operating permits which does not meet the guidelines as recommended by EPA.
For fees, there was a concern that NDEE did not provide a documented allocation methodology
for the allocation of certain expenses funded by Title V fees. The following observations are in
no particular order and most are discussed in more detail later in the report.
Observations
In summary, EPA has determined that NDEE's fee schedule meets the requirements of Part 70
and is therefore presumptively adequate. Further, EPA did not identify any significant concerns
with NDEE's management of the Title V program in relation to the use of Title V fees and the
ability for the state to adequately fund the Title V permit program at the current time. EPA did
note that NDEE is allocating certain expenses, captured by activity codes, to multiple funding
sources. NDEE did not provide a documented allocation methodology for the historical alloca-
tion. It is recommended that NDEE document and support the allocation methodology being
used to ensure the rational is defensible.
Most permit limits appeared to be practically enforceable. However, NDEE's use of simple in-
corporation by reference in both construction and operating permits is concerning and not con-
sidered practically enforceable. Vague high-level citations to an entire NESHAP orNSPS sub-
part should not be used. We recommend the permit cite to the level necessary to identify the ap-
plicable requirements that apply to each emissions unit and to identify how the unit will comply
with the requirements. The permit needs to be specific enough that it is clear and is not reasona-
bly subject to misinterpretation. The permit must include specific regulatory citations in each ap-
plicable requirement identifying the emission limitations and standards; and the monitoring,
recordkeeping, reporting, and testing requirements associated with the emission limitations and
standards need to be specific enough to ensure compliance with the permit. The EPA has ob-
jected to operating permit which incorporated by reference NESHAP or NSPS requirements
without providing sufficient detail to determine the specific requirements that apply to emission
units at the source.
The NDEE uses air dispersion modeling or other means to assure that new sources or modifica-
tions will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any ambient air quality standard
when PSD applies. During the file review, we found several permitting actions where NDEE has
conducted air modeling for non-PSD sources.
The NDEE uses an electronic records system, Enterprise Content Management Portal (ECMP),
for records storage. This system can be accessed and is available for the general public. The EPA
was able to find most of the files needed for the file review in the system.
2
-------
We did not observe any incorrect NSPS/NESHAP applicability/non-applicability determinations
in the files we reviewed. However, more specificity should be used when standards are incorpo-
rated into permits by reference. Especially incorporating standards at the subpart level is prob-
lematic since often various parts of standards apply or do not apply depending on the specifics at
the particular facility. The EPA Administrator has objected to Title V permits for not adequately
incorporating the specific applicable requirements that apply to the facility when incorporating at
the Subpart level.1 Being more specific would ensure that the permittee and the public are made
aware of the applicable requirements in a clear and consistent manner.
NDEE Title 129, Chapter 14 requires construction permits and Class I and Class II operating per-
mits to have the opportunity for the public to participate in the permit development or modifica-
tion process prior to issuance. The regulation appears to require public notice for all major and
minor permits with the exception of permit modifications qualifying for administrative or minor
permit revision. It appears that both construction and operating permits are being issued in ac-
cordance with EPA recommendations and NDEE regulations. The file review discovered that the
public is given at least 30 days notice via newspapers to submit comments. The draft permits are
also posted on the NDEE website during the public comment period and documents related to
the permit are available to the public using ECMP. We commend NDEE for this good practice
and encourage them to continue it.
NDEE posts their final major and minor construction permits and Class I and Class II operating
permits in the ECMP. This is not a requirement, but in the interest of open public information
sharing, this practice is to be commended. During the file review, we found supporting docu-
ments such as email communications and telephone conversation records in most of the files;
however, some files were missing this documentation. When these types of documents are pre-
served in the ECMP, it provides a stronger permitting record.
NDEE has two local agencies, Lincoln Lancaster County Health Department and Omaha Air
Quality Control, that issues major and minor construction permits on behalf of the state and the
local agency.
All permits reviewed had a fact sheet/statement of basis included in the file. The Fact Sheets
have been streamlined over the past years, but still contain essential information.
The NDEE has a very low permit backlog, and for the most part, issued both operating and con-
struction permits timely. However, variances were found to be issued on a regular basis.
The NDEE does a good job of early engagement with the EPA on controversial permits, both
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V. The NDEE provides EPA with the
1 For example, see the March 18, 2022, order responding to the ExxonMobil Corp., Baytown Chemical Plant peti-
tion available at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/exxonmobil-baytown-order_3-18-22.pdf.
3
-------
modeling protocols and invites the EPA to meetings between the two agencies to discuss con-
cerns prior to final drafting of the permit.
C. CATEGORIZED COMMENTS
1. General
a. Staffing
The NDEE air permitting program is divided into two groups - the Construction Permit Section
which includes the modeling staff and the Operating Permit Section. The air permitting program
has a total of 20 staff positions with 16 of the positions currently filled. This includes one Ad-
ministrator, two Section Supervisors, 14 permit writers, two air modelers, and one clerical. The
average length of NSR permit writing experience is less than 5 years excluding the Administra-
tor.
The NDEE expressed an interest in the EPA providing additional training opportunities.
b. Incorporation by Reference:
Most permit limits appeared to be practically enforceable. However, NDEE's use of incorpora-
tion by reference in both construction and operating permits is concerning. In many of the per-
mits we reviewed, NDEE includes "Specific Conditions For Affected Emission Points" like the
following:
"The source shall comply with the applicable emission limitations and testing require-
ments as specified in 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart () and 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart ()";
or
"The source shall comply with the applicable notifications, record keeping, and reporting
as required by 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A and (); or
"The permittee shall comply with all applicable operational and monitoring requirements
from NSPS Subpart for emission unit (xxxx)"; or
"The source shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable NSPS Subpart A and ( )
requirements";
This approach to incorporation by reference does not meet the guidelines as recommended in
EPA's White Paper #2 for Improved Implementation of the Part 70 Operating Permits Program
(March 5, 1996). The guidance in White Paper #2 states:
"Incorporation by reference in permits may be appropriate and useful under several cir-
cumstances. Appropriate use of incorporation by reference in permits includes referenc-
ing of test method procedures, inspection and maintenance plans and calculation methods
4
-------
for determining compliance. One of the key objectives Congress hoped to achieve in cre-
ating title V, however, was the issuance of comprehensive permits that clarify how
sources must comply with applicable requirements. Permitting authorities should there-
fore balance the streamlining benefits achieved through incorporation by reference with
the need to issue comprehensive, unambiguous permits useful to all affected parties in-
cluding those engaged in field inspections."
The white paper further states:
"Section 504(a) states that each permit "shall include enforceable emission limitations
and standards" and "Such other conditions as are necessary to ensure compliance with
applicable requirements."
In addition, section 504(c) requires each permit to "set forth inspection, entry, monitoring, com-
pliance certification and reporting requirements to assure compliance with the permit terms and
conditions." Analogous provisions are contained in Sections 70.6(a)(1) and (3).
The EPA interprets these provisions to place limits on the type of information that may be refer-
enced in permits.
We suggest that NDEE strongly consider including the EPA suggested specificity around en-
forceable emission limitations, compliance verification methodology, monitoring and record
keeping and reporting requirements.
c. Other General Observations
We did not notice any documentation on Environmental Justice (EJ) in the files we reviewed.
From the Questionnaires we learned that NDEE does not have legislation or a formal
policy or guidance expressly addressing environmental justice in permitting. However, NDEE
stated that in the administration of its programs and activities, they seek to ensure fair treatment
of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and meaningful involve-
ment of the public with respect to their environmental programs. NDEE has placed a non-dis-
crimination statement prominently on its webpage and designated a deputy director as the point
of contact for any questions. Other examples include (1) extensive stakeholder outreach in the
regulation development process, (2) public information sessions associated with draft permits in
addition to public hearings, (3) a robust citizen complaint system and an online "report a prob-
lem", (4) compliance assistance on NESHAPs and NSPS, (5) an enforcement goal to protect and
reduce risk to human health and the environment, (6) grant programs, and (7) the ability to utilize
limited language translation services. During the file review, we observed that after a permit was
issued, there was a citizen complaint to which NDEE responded. The telephone conversation
record outlined the NDEE's response to the citizen complaint. NDEE's response is to be com-
mented in addressing citizens' concerns. We understand that NDEE is not required by the Clean
Air Act or their State Implementation Plan to address EJ in permitting actions. However, people
5
-------
can file complaints for violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the NDEE. This
has happened in another state in Region 7 related to an air permit. Therefore, we encourage the
NDEE to consider additional EJ issues and engage with communities.
The NDEE's electronic records system, Enterprise Content Management Portal (ECMP), seems
to work well and is extremely useful with employees working remotely and when access is de-
sired by EPA, other states, or the general public. The EPA was able to access records using the
ECMP for the file reviews. The system seems easy to use, and we had no issues accessing the
records stored in the system. We did notice a few documents had not been added to the system,
and when we reported the omissions to the Section Supervisor, the documents were added. If the
ECMP is the official file repository, we suggest that each permit writer check the ECMP after the
final permit has been issued to ensure that all the files were uploaded to the ECMP. This process
would provide a quality assurance check of the completeness of the final permit record.
2. Construction Permitting
a. Assuring Healthy Air Quality
We reviewed the construction permitting records for evidence that the NDEE was considering
the impact to air quality when issuing permits. 40 CFR §51.160(a) states: "Eachplan must set
forth legally enforceable procedures that enable the State or local agency to determine whether
the construction or modification of a facility, building, structure or installation, or combination
of these will result in(1) A violation of applicable portions of the control strategy; or (2) Inter-
ference with attainment or maintenance of a national standard in the State in which the proposed
source (or modification) is located or in a neighboring State. "
In the NSR Questionnaire, NDEE stated that preconstruction monitoring requirements are speci-
fied in NDEE's PSD and Minor Source Modeling Guidance available on the NDEE's website at:
http://dee.ne.gov/publica.nsf/PubsForm.xsp7docu-
metId=84D0237BF4S27070862581940067B0CA.&action=openDocument
NDEE responded that they routinely provide representative ambient monitoring data in lieu of
requiring applicants to perform preconstruction monitoring. They stated the basis for the moni-
toring value selected included data from the agency's ambient air monitoring stations. The basis
for the monitoring value is selected in accordance with the National Ambient Air Quality Stand-
ards (NAAQS) and other relevant regulations. Ambient air concentrations (monitored values) are
directly measured and use the applicable NAAQS averaging period (i.e., 3-year average for 24-
hour PM2.5) as per regulation. Modeled impacts are predicted based on emissions, and use a 5-
year met data set to capture the worst possible meteorological conditions. Background concentra-
tions determined by monitored NAAQS averaging period are added to the predicted modeled im-
pacts to capture concentrations attributable to natural sources, unidentified sources in the vicinity
of the project, and regional transport contributions from distant sources.
6
-------
The NDEE reported that they follow EPA's modeling guidelines in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix
W. Minor NSR sources modeling procedures follows Appendix W as much as practical, how-
ever, minor sources do not perform secondary pollutant analysis for PM2.5 and ozone (i.e., a
Tier 1 Modeled Emission Rates for Precursors (MERPs) demonstration), model haul roads, or
model PSD Class II Increments. Only a few of the files we review indicated that minor source
modeling had been done. For Major NSR modeling, every attempt is made to conform to Ap-
pendix W guidelines. The Department does submit to EPA Region 7 request for approval of any
non-regulatory modeling options.
The NDEE stated that they ask applicants to submit a modeling protocol for approval prior to
submitting modeling. The NDEE asks applicants to conform its modeling demonstration to guid-
ance issued by both EPA and NDEE. When an applicant's air quality modeling reveals NAAQS
and/or PSD increment violations, NDEE requires a culpability analysis to demonstrate that the
facility is not contributing to the violation at a level equal to or greater than the SIL. Failing that
analysis, the facility can add additional control technology or possibly modify source characteris-
tics (e.g., increase the stack height in accordance with GEP regulations) to resolve the violations.
The NDEE stated that in the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracked. NDEE does conduct modeling for NSR major projects and/or NSR major mod-
ification projects and takes into consideration consuming/expanding sources. NDEE recently
hired an additional modeler into the Section and is working on a plan to formalize increment
consumption/expansion inventory for the State.
The NDEE modeling staff does really well in engaging with EPA Region 7 modeling staff. The
NDEE provides ample time to review modeling protocols. NDEE often reaches out to Region 7
staff to discuss modeling topics and issues that are needed to produce a modeling demonstration
than conforms to EPA regulations and guidance.
Upon review of the RACT/B ACT/LEAR Clearinghouse (RBLC) database, we found that NDEE
needs to enter some Best Available Control Technology (BACT) decisions into the database. We
have learned that they currently have a new staff member who is in the process of entering data,
learning the program and has asked assistance from EPA recently.
b. Other Construction Permitting Observations
The Lincoln Lancaster County Health Department and Omaha Air Quality Control issue NSR
7
-------
permits on behalf of the NDEE. In the NSR Questionnaire, the NDEE stated that they review
NSR permits and have regular communication with the two local agencies; collaborates with the
local agencies on questions in regard to facilities; aids with modeling for the local agencies,
shares training opportunities as they become available, and the NDEE has opportunity to com-
ment during public notice on draft permits. This program review did not reveal any record of
these local permit reviews. The EPA did not find any report or record of these reviews occurring
or if they are documented. If they are not documented, we recommend that NDEE developing a
method of preserving any permit comments and a record of the reviews. The information col-
lected indicates that there is no longer a formalized auditing program that NDEE conducts for the
local agencies.
c. Variances
During the file review, we discovered several variances for construction permits that were being
drafted. The NDEE stated in the NSR Questionnaire that during 2019 through 2021, they did not
issue any variances for projects that were issued a PSD permit. However, 15 variances were issued
for synthetic minor projects allowing construction prior to receiving a permit, and there were 14
variances for true minor projects allowing construction prior to receiving a permit. The EPA does
not agree with NDEQ's use of variances in their PSD and synthetic minor permitting program. A pro-
ject that has the potential to emit criteria pollutants at or above the major source thresholds should be
considered a PSD project until a permit is issued limiting emissions below those thresholds. We en-
courage NDEQ to continue providing notice of all variances to EPA when they are issued and to refrain
from issuing variances for projects that have not received a permit limiting the emissions below PSD
thresholds prior to a permit being issued that limits the project emissions to synthetic minor limits.
3. NSPS/NESHAP
We did not observe any incorrect NSPS/NESHAP applicability/non-applicability determinations
in the files we reviewed. The permit application forms seemed well designed to collect infor-
mation needed to determine NSPS/NESHAP applicability. However, we found that some files
do not contain much documentation which support the NSPS/NESHAP decisions. In some cases,
the description in the permit provided explanations for determinations and referenced guidance
documents relied upon. However, there were records where we did not see any documentation in
the file explaining the rationale of the determination.
4. Operating Permits
a. Title V Fees
Section 502(b)(3)(A) of the Clean Air Act (Act) requires Title V operating permit programs to
fund all "reasonable direct and indirect costs" of the permit programs through fees collected from
Title V sources and requires the fees to be sufficient to cover all reasonable Title V permit pro-
gram costs. 40 CFR §70.9(a) requires state Title V programs to collect fees sufficient to cover
8
-------
the permit program costs and "ensure that any fee required by this section will be used solely for
permit program costs."
In response to an EPA Office of Inspector General 2014 report, regarding the importance of en-
hanced EPA oversight of state, local, and tribal fee practices under Title V of the Act, the EPA
issued a March 27, 2018 guidance titled "Program and Fee Evaluation Strategy Guidance for 40
CFR Part 70." This guidance recommends the EPA seek internal assistance for fee evaluations
from staff with governmental accounting, financial, or economics expertise, who work outside
the Part 70 program. For this review, Kathy Finazzo from the EPA Region 7's Resources and Fi-
nancial Management Branch in the Mission Support Division provided assistance.
The following is a summary of the fee requirements that guide EPA's review of air agency pro-
grams.
Title V permit fees must be paid by "part 70 sources", and the permit fees must cover all "rea-
sonable (direct and indirect) costs" of the permit program. If the permit fees at least cover the to-
tal permit program costs, the fees are deemed to be sufficient.
Any fee required by part 70 must "be used solely for permit program costs" - in other words, re-
quired permit fees may not be diverted for non-part 70 purposes. Nothing in part 70 restricts air
agencies from collecting additional fees beyond the minimum amount needed to cover part 70
program costs; however, all fees (including surplus) must be used for part 70 purposes.
In compliance with federal regulations, the provisions of Neb. Rev. Stat. 81-1505.34, as
amended, state that NDEE is required to collect an annual fee on the emissions from major
sources of air pollution in an amount sufficient to cover the costs of the implementation of the
permit program. This statute provides flexibility to develop and adjust the fee according to fed-
eral regulations or "as required to pay all reasonably direct and indirect costs of developing and
administrating the air quality permit program."
NDEE's Title V operating permit program is principally funded by annual emission fees charged
to Title V (Class I) sources. The program also generates interest income from carry over emis-
sion fee revenue and may receive an occasional fee related to drafting a significant modification
to an existing permit.
The NDEE air quality permit program issues predominantly Title V permits, though also issues
Class II operating permits for synthetic minors, Class II operating permits for natural minors and
construction permits. Only Class I permits pay an annual emission fee. NDEE does collect appli-
cation fees for construction permits but does not collect any fees for Class II operating permits.
The state of Nebraska fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30. Emission fees collected based on
the 2021 emission inventory are used to fund the 2023 fiscal year. EPA's presumptive Title V
fee in effect during Nebraska's 2021 fiscal year was $52.79 per ton. Total emissions reported
9
-------
from Nebraska Title V sources during the 2020 calendar year used for the presumptive minimum
calculation were 37,521 ton of regulated pollutants. Therefore, the presumptive minimum fee
collection amount calculates to be $1,980,733.59 (37,521 tons x $52.79/ton). Nebraska reported
emission fees collected as $2,526,339.92. Therefore, Nebraska collected an amount greater than
or equal to the presumptive fee required by EPA and is therefore presumed to have adequate fees
to fund the Title V program.
For the 2021 emission inventory, NDEE's emission fee charged was $50 per ton of regulated
pollutant. Emission inventories are reported by sources and tracked in the State and Local Emis-
sions Inventory System (SLEIS). A cap of 4,000 tons per regulated pollutant applied to all major
sources. Further, Nebraska spent $2,165,213.09 to fund the Title V program in fiscal 2021,
which is also less than the amount collected for fiscal 2021. NDEE's operating result for the
2021 fiscal year was $361,126.83, and its fund balance including retained earnings was
$3,687,030.10. NDEE does plan to minimize future emission fee rates by applying past surplus
funds toward future rate calculations.
Fees collected from major sources are used to implement Nebraska's Class I program. As previ-
ously stated, Nebraska statute requires that emission fees can only be used for purposes of the
direct and indirect costs associated with the Class I permit program. (Neb. Rev. Stat. 81-
1505.05).
Nebraska's Payroll and Financial Center System is utilized to document time and resources spent
on the air quality permit programs. The Air Quality Permit Program Emission Fee Appropria-
tions Report notes that program activities are either charged to the:
1. Title V program,
2. the "state" program (the 105 grant program - federal and state funds),
3. the federal 103 program (maintains the ambient monitoring network (federal funds) or
4. construction permit application fee program.
All time spent by staff on the Title V program is recorded as program activity on timesheets in
the Payroll and Financial Center System. The Title V program includes activities associated with
major sources and synthetic minor sources. Each Title V and Class II synthetic minor facility has
a unique project number code that is used on employee timesheets that tracks all hours of activity
for that facility. NDEE defines a Class II synthetic minor source as a source that has a potential
to emit to be a major source, but through enforceable limits has lowered its potential to emit to
below the major source thresholds.
The largest expense of NDEE's permit program is personnel costs comprising 72% of total costs
incurred. Personnel costs plus indirect costs comprise 95% of total costs incurred. NDEE operat-
ing permit writers do not work exclusively on Title V permits. The operating permit team re-
views and drafts both Class I and Class II operating permits. All time spent by staff on the Title
V program is recorded as program activity on timesheets. All permit staff code every 0.25 hour
10
-------
of work time to a specific activity code on their timesheet. Permit, planning, and compliance pro-
gram staff may also work on Title V related issues and they too document time by primary activ-
ity and by specific source or non-source specific activities.
There are an additional 5 primary activity codes used by NDEE staff to capture expenses that
benefit both the Air 105 program and the Title V program. These 5 activity codes are classified
as: Compliance Office Activities, Planning Office, Operating Permit Office, Construction Permit
Office, and NO FID/Permit. NDEE staff did not provide documented support for the allocation
methodology being used, though believed that historically, costs charged to these activity codes
were funded 30% by the Air 105 program and 70% by the Title V program. The current alloca-
tion methodology being applied when these activity codes are used splits the costs charged to 3
different funding sources, with 82% being charged to the Title V program. As NDEE has been
using an historical allocation for these jointly benefitting expenses, it is recommended that
NDEE document and support the allocation methodology being used to ensure the rational is de-
fensible.
Regarding the use of Title V emission fees to fund activities associated with synthetic minor
sources, EPA has issued guidance which could be interpreted in different ways. As previously
noted, EPA issued guidance that states any fee required by part 70 must "be used solely for per-
mit program costs", in other words, required permit fees may not be diverted for non-part 70 pur-
poses. Alternatively, EPA issued a memorandum on August 28, 1994, titled "Additional Guid-
ance on Funding Support for State and Local Air Programs" which states that depending upon
how a state has designed its Title V program, permitting expenses associated with the costs of
synthetic minor sources may be either Title V or grant eligible.
Synthetic minor sources are those which have the capacity to emit pollutants in excess of thresh-
old quantities for major sources but, through federally enforceable restrictions, are required to
emit less. If a state chooses to establish limits on potential to emit using its approved Title V pro-
gram, then the costs related to creating these limits are Title V costs.
In summary, EPA has determined that NDEE's fee schedule meets the requirements of Part 70
and is therefore presumptively adequate. Further, EPA did not identify any significant concerns
with NDEE's management of the Title V program in relation to the use of Title V fees and the
ability for the state to adequately fund the Title V permit program at the current time.
b. Other Title V Observations
The EPA tracks Title V timely permit issuance with semiannual reports called the Title V Oper-
ating Permits System (TOPS). The TOPS report from the NDEE for the period of January 1,
2022 through June 30, 2022 demonstrated that the NDEE is issuing Title V permits in a timely
manner. NDEE reported four initial Part 70 applications older than 18 months.
11
-------
The NDEE sends reminders to facilities approximately 12 months prior to the renewal of their
operating permit. Providing these reminders is not a requirement of the Title V program. We be-
lieve NDEE should continue this practice since it likely reduces the number of late renewal ap-
plications, is a nice compliance assistance service to the facilities, and puts NDEE in a better en-
forcement position if facilities fail to submit their renewal application timely.
The NDEE makes their final Title V permits available on the internet through the ECMP. Like-
wise, NDEE posts a notice of draft permits on the internet during the public comment period
with a link to the related documents. They also send email notifications to EPA, affected states,
locals and tribes of draft Title V permits on public notice.
12
-------
ATTACHMENT A: List of Sources Reviewed
FID#
Facility Name
Location
39525
ADM Animal Nutrition
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
Columbus
72698
Ag Processing Inc.
Hastings
114697
Alliance Animal Clinic
Alliance
84069
AltEn, LLC
Mead
114917
American Butchers, LLC
Beaver City
40343
AmesTrue Temper
Falls City
7083
Ansley Light Plant
Ansley
4129
Ash Grove Cement Co
Louisville
111979
AT&T Chadron
Chadron
36919
Auburn Generating Plant
Auburn
87072
Aurora West LLC
Aurora
111281
Blue Valley Crematory LLC
Milford
104962
Blueprint Engines
Kearney
87464
Bridgeport Ethanol
Bridgport
55093
Broken Bow Pwer Plant
Broken Bow
59060
Calloway MPP
Calloway
83871
Cambridge Interconnector Substation
Cambridge
58355
Chappell MPP
Chappell
61713
City Of Neligh
Neligh
111584
Columbus Hydraulics Company,
LLC
Columbus
100535
Consolidated Grain and Barge Co.
Falls City
112636
Cross Creek Animal Health Cntr
Staplehurst
58332
Curtis MPP
Curtis
115525
Dakota City Renewable Energy, LLC
Dakota City
41253
Darling Ingredients
Bellevue
2374
Eaton Corporation, LLC
Kearney
86751
Eco-Energy Distribution - Beatrice,
LLC
Beatrice
84534
Elkhorn Valley Ethanol, LLC
Norfolk
65024
Evonik
13
-------
106518
Fireball Group
Papillion
58429
FlexCON
Columbus
86026
Flint Hills Resources
Fairmont
107214
Fortigen Geneva
Geneva
62575
Gavilon Fertilizer - Hastings
Hastings
112122
Gehrig-Stitt Chapel & Cremation
Service, LLC
Sidney
86416
Green Plains Atkinson
Atkinson
82836
Green Plains Central City LLC
Central City
86000
Green Plains Wood River, LLC
Wood River
86876
Hansen Hog West LLC
Hartington
51621
Harman Wright Morturary
Beatrice
77861
Heartwell Renewables LLC
Hastings
75073
KAAPA Ethanol, LLC
Minden
2409
KAAPA Grains, LLC
Elm Creek
106013
Keystone Veterinary Services
Humphrey
58348
Kimball MPP
Kimball
76680
Lincoln Premium Poultry
Fremont
57640
Lincoln Water Systems - Ashland
Ashland
53676
Lindsay Manufacturing, LLC
Lindsay
84157
MBA Broilers - East
Tecum seh
57979
Merck Animal Health
Elkhorn
73092
Metal-Tech Partners
Geneva
112462
Midwest Machine & Tool
Columbus
89693
Monsanto
Waco
37388
Nebraska City PP #1
Nebraska City
64753
Nebraska City Utilities PP #3
Nebraska City
84221
Nebraska Corn Processing
Cambridge
98441
Nebraska Vault Company
Columbus
35605
Nebraska Wilbert Vault Co.
Norfolk
35157
Northeast Community College
Norfolk
23382
Northern Natural Gas Company
Beatrice
62420
NPPD lOOOkW Mobile Generator
York
84283
Nucor Cold Finish
Norfolk
35677
Nucor Steel
Norfolk
58737
Nustar North Platte Terminal (for-
merly owned by Kaneb Pipeline)
North Platte
-------
58390
48716
58343
62593
116135
86905
108432
108432
86963
92461
113269
65775
26807
24352
27522
56628
58735
78323
7339
8744
85814
57476
22872
107024
43328
103925
44141
Offutt AFB
Offutt AFB
Omaha Steel Castings Co
Wahoo
OPPD NE City
Nebraska City
Pheasant Point Recycling & Disposal
(Douglas Co. RDF)
Bennington
Pioneer Animal Clinic
Scottsbluff
Preferred Sands
Genoa
Raven Northbrook
Papillion
Raven Northbrook LLC
Springfield
Rockies Express Pipeline
Odell
Scoular Grain Co North Grant
Ogallala
Scribner Diesel Generation Station
Scribner
South Sioux City WWTF
South Sioux City
Stuart MPP
Stuart
Swift Beef Company
Grand Island
Tecumseh MPP
Tecum seh
TIGT - Big Springs Compressor Sta-
tion
Big Springs
TIGT North Platte Compressor
North Platte
Trenton Agri Products, LLC
Trenton
Tyson Fresh Meats
Dakota City
Tyson Fresh Meats Incorporated
Lexington
Valero
Albion
Valmont Industries
Valley
Village of Oxford Light Plant
Oxford
Viridis Chemical
Columbus
Wahoo Power Plant
Wahoo
West Plains, LLC
Chadron
Western Sugar
Scottsbluff
15
-------
List of Files Reviewed
FID#
Facility Name
Decision date
Location
39525
ADM Animal Nutrition
07/11/19
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
01/03/19
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
04/03/19
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
1/2/2020
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
1/22/2020
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
2/11/2020
Columbus
39285
ADM Corn Processing
2/11/2020
Columbus
72698
Ag Processing Inc.
3/26/2021
Hastings
72698
AGP
2/22/2021
Hasting
114697
Alliance Animal Clinic
8/14/2020
Alliance
84069
AltEn, LLC
5/23/2019
Mead
114917
American Butchers, LLC
5/17/2021
Beaver City
40343
AmesTrue Temper
2/7/2019
Falls City
7083
Ansley Light Plant
6/3/2021
Ansley
4129
Ash Grove Cement
7/12/2021
Louisville
4129
Ash Grove Cement Co
05/22/19
Louisville
4129
Ash Grove Cement Co
3/18/2020
Louisville
111979
AT&T Chadron
02/04/19
Chadron
36919
Auburn Generating Plant
8/4/2021
Auburn
87072
Aurora West LLC
6/24/2020
Aurora
111281
Blue Valley Crematory LLC
4/6/2021
Milford
104962
Blueprint Engines
4/19/2021
Kearney
87464
Bridgeport Ethanol
2/1/2021
Bridgport
55093
Broken Bow Pwer Plant
2/22/2021
Broken Bow
59060
Calloway MPP
11/12/2021
Calloway
83871
Cambridge Interconnector Substation
11/30/2021
Cambridge
58355
Chappell MPP
5/20/2020
Chappell
61713
City Of Neligh
1/2/2020
Neligh
111584
Columbus Hydraulics Company, LLC
02/15/19
Columbus
100535
Consolidated Grain and Barge Co
6/30/2021
Fall City
100535
Consolidated Grain and Barge Co
10/15/2021
Falls City
100535
Consolidated Grain and Barge Co.
12/03/19
Falls City
112636
Cross Creek Animal Health Cntr
6/18/2020
Staplehurst
16
-------
58332
115525
41253
41253
2374
2374
2374
86751
84534
84534
65024
106518
58429
58429
58429
86026
86026
107214
107214
62575
112122
112122
86416
82836
86000
86000
86000
86000
86876
51621
77861
75073
75073
75073
2409
106013
Curtis MPP
8/18/2021
Curtis
Dakota City Renewable Energy, LLC
6/3/2021
Dakota City
Darling Ingredients
7/2/2019
Bellevue
Darling Ingredients
12/21/2021
Bellevue
Eaton Corporation
4/7/2020
Kearney
Eaton Corporation
9/21/2021
Kearney
Eaton Corporation, LLC
4/28/2021
Kearney
Eco-Energy Distribution - Beatrice, LLC
12/29/2021
Beatrice
Elkhorn Valley Ethanol
7/23/2019
Norfolk
Elkhorn Valley Ethanol, LLC
1/30/2020
Norfolk
Evonik
07/18/19
Fireball Group
2/19/2020
Papillion
FLEXcon
02/28/19
Columbus
FLEXcon
08/29/19
Columbus
FlexCON
3/4/2021
Columbus
Flint Hills Resources
05/16/19
Fairmont
Flint Hills Resources Fairmont
6/17/2021
Fairmont
Fortigen
7/30/2020
Geneva
Fortigen Geneva
11/14/19
Geneva
Gavilon Fertilizer - Hastings
06/20/19
Hastings
Gehrig Stitt Chapel
1/21/2020
Sidney
Gehrig-Stitt Chapel & Cremation Service,
LLC
02/27/19
Sidney
Green Plains Atkinson
5/29/2019
Atkinson
Green Plains Central City LLC
11/16/2021
Central City
Green Plains Wood River
7/12/2021
Wood River
Green Plains Wood River LLC
8/19/2021
Wood River
Green Plains Wood River LLC
7/28/2020
Wood River
Green Plains Wood River, LLC
2/6/2020
Wood River
Hansen Hog West LLC
3/29/2021
Harrington
Harman Wright Morturary
6/18/2020
Beatrice
Heartwell Renewables LLC
9/15/2020
Hastings
KAAPA Ethanol, LLC
05/03/19
Minden
KAAPA Ethanol, LLC
9/18/2020
Minden
KAAPA Ethanol, LLC - Minden
3/3/2020
Minden
KAAPA Grains, LLC
07/10/19
Elm Creek
Keystone Veterinary Services
3/4/2019
Humphrey
17
-------
58348
Kimball MPP
11/12/2021
Kimball
76680
Lincoln Premium Poultry
4/29/2020
Fremont
57640
Lincoln Water Systems - Ashland
9/29/2021
Ashland
53676
Lindsay Manufacturing, LLC
09/09/19
Lindsay
84157
MBA Broilers - East
2/11/2019
Tecum seh
57979
Merck Animal
1/30/2020
Elkhorn
57979
Merck Animal Health
6/16/2020
Elkhorn
73092
Metal-Tech Partners
3/8/2021
Geneva
112462
Midwest Machine & Tool
08/02/19
Columbus
89693
Monsanto
07/25/19
Waco
37388
Nebraska City PP #1
10/23/2019
Nebraska City
64753
Nebraska City Utilities PP #3
9/30/2021
Nebraska City
84221
Nebraska Corn Processing
1/16/2020
Cambridge
84221
Nebraska Corn Processing
2/3/2020
Cambridge
98441
Nebraska Vault Company
5/13/2021
Columbus
35605
Nebraska Wilbert Vault Co.
3/4/2019
Norfolk
35157
Northeast Community College
2/18/2020
Norfolk
23382
Northern Natural Gas Company
10/29/2020
Beatrice
62420
NPPD lOOOkW Mobile Generator
12/31/2020
York
84283
Nucor Cold Finish
3/28/2019
Norfolk
35677
Nucor Steel
3/11/2020
Norfolk
35677
Nucor Steel
8/20/2020
Norfolk
58737
Nustar North Platte Terminal (formerly
owned by Kaneb Pipeline)
7/1/2020
North Platte
58390
Offutt AFB
1/30/2019
Offutt AFB
48716
Omaha Steel
01/22/19
Wahoo
48716
Omaha Steel
03/20/19
Wahoo
48716
Omaha Steel
11/12/2021
Wahoo
48716
Omaha Steel Castings Co
10/29/2020
Wahoo
58343
OPPD NE City
12/02/19
NECity
58343
OPPD NE City
12/02/19
NECity
58343
OPPD NE City
3/6/2020
Nebraska City
62593
Pheasant Point Recycling & Disposal
(Douglas Co. RDF)
01/22/19
Bennington
116135
Pioneer Animal Clinic
8/16/2021
Scottsbluff
86905
Preferred Sands
7/9/2019
Genoa
86905
Preferred Sands
7/9/2019
Genoa
18
-------
108432
Raven Northbrook
3/31/2020
Papillion
108432
Raven Northbrook
10/26/2021
Papillion
108432
Raven Northbrook LLC
11/21/2019
Springfield
86963
REX - Steele City
8/13/2020
Odell
86963
Rockies Express Pipeline
3/10/2020
Odell
92461
Scoular Grain Co North Grant
10/5/2020
Ogallala
113269
Scribner Diesel Generation Station
4/7/2020
Scribner
65775
South Sioux City WWTF
3/15/2021
South Sioux City
26807
Stuart MPP
1/24/2019
Stuart
24352
Swift Beef Company
11/18/19
Grand Island
27522
Tecumseh MPP
6/3/2021
Tecumseh
56628
TIGT - Big Springs Compressor Station
3/15/2021
Big Springs
58735
TIGT North Platte Compressor
10/20/2020
North Platte
78323
Trenton Agri Products
1/22/2020
Trenton
78323
Trenton Agri Products
4/9/2020
Trenton
78323
Trenton Agri Products
4/9/2020
Trenton
78323
Trenton Agri Products, LLC
11/26/19
Trenton
7339
Tyson Fresh Meats
5/19/2021
Dakota City
8744
Tyson Fresh Meats Incorporated
6/10/2020
Lexington
85814
Valero
10/07/19
Albion
85814
Valero
10/07/19
Albion
57476
Valmont Industries
3/12/2019
Valley
22872
Village of Oxford Light Plant
12/3/2019
Oxford
107024
Viridis Chemical
9/8/2020
Columbus
107024
Viridis Chemical
7/15/2021
Columbus
43328
Wahoo Power Plant
7/27/2021
Wahoo
103925
West Plains, LLC
9/21/2021
Chadron
44141
Western Sugar
06/07/19
Scottsbluff
44141
Western Sugar
1/6/2021
Scottsbluff
19
-------
ATTACHMENT B: Completed NSR Questionnaire and Appendix A
Returned by NDEE prior to Audit.
[ see the attached copy ]
20
-------
NSR Program
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
NDEE - 2022
Last Updated: December 5, 2006
-------
Instructions for completing the
New Source Review (NSR) Permit Program
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
When answering Yes or No questions, please add explanation as
appropriate to clarify your response.
This self-evaluation questionnaire does not address implementation of
changes made to the federal major NSR rules in EPA's rulemaking on
December 31, 2002 (as amended November 7, 2003)
Please skip any sections of the self-evaluation questionnaire that do not
apply within your permitting jurisdiction rather than answering
hypothetically. For example, skip the nonattainment major NSR
sections if you do not have any nonattainment areas.
If you have a written policy or guidance document that substantially
answers any question in this self-evaluation questionnaire, please so
indicate and either attach a hardcopy to your response or point to a
specific URL on your public web server where the document may be
found.
This self-evaluation questionnaire was developed by EPA Headquarters
and Regions to assist in the agency's NSR oversight program. As part
of its peer review process, EPA sought review and comment from
STAPPA-ALAPCO. While this questionnaire has undergone a make-
over from the original, the scope and detail of the questions asked
remains the same for all agencies.
2
-------
Table of Contents
I. Overview of New Source Review (NSR) Permitting Program 4
A. NSR Permits 4
B. Staff and Training 8
C. NSR Implementation 11
D. Public Participation 12
E. Program Benefits 15
II. Major NSR Permitting 15
A. Applicability 15
B. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permitting 20
C. Nonattainment Major NSR Permitting 27
III. NSR Avoidance 32
A. RMRR exemption 32
B. PCP (Pollution Control Projects) Exemption 34
C. Circumvention/Aggregation 35
D. Synthetic Minor Permit Limits 35
E. Relaxation 37
IV. Minor Source Construction Permitting Program 38
V. Modeling 38
A. PSD Modeling 38
B. Nonattainment Major NSR Modeling 45
C. Minor Source Modeling 45
D. Increment Tracking 46
VI. Other Program Elements 49
A. Environmental Justice (EJ) 49
B. Endangered Species Act (ESA) 51
3
-------
I. Overview of New Source Review (NSR)
Permitting Program
A. NSR Permits
1. Permit Tracking
1. Do you have an established procedure for tracking major NSR
permits?
If yes, please describe how your permits are being tracked {e.g., in an
electronic database)
Response: I has an internal tracking system (Excel Spreadsheet) that tracks all
applications received. This system tracks the process of the application
i receipt to issuance,
2. Do you have an established procedure for tracking synthetic minor
permits?
If yes, please describe how your permits are being tracked {e.g., in an
electronic database)
Response: I has an internal tracking system (Excel Spreadsheet) that tracks all
applications received. This system tracks the process of the application
i receipt to issuance,
2. Permit Issuance Rates
1. How many PSD permits did you issue last year?
a. If none, when was the last PSD permit issued?
Response: II ill «ll II has not issued any major III ! [» irmits or major modifications of
major NSR facility permits last calendar year. The major modification
under til v III ! |-h -ram permit was issued on 12/ l i" II l <" 3).
2. How many nonattainment major NSR permits did you issue last year?
a. If none, when was the last nonattainment Major NSR permit
issued?
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment 11 ! [ -i ogrnn 1 as not currently apply
to Nebraska,
3. How many synthetic minor NSR permits did you issue last year?
Response: I the calendar year 2021, there were 11 synthetic minor NSR permits
issued.
4
-------
Response:
4. How many true minor NSR permits did you issue last year?
For the calendar year 2021, there were 31 true minor NSR permits issued.
5. How many "as built" NSR permits did you issue last year?
Response: For the calendar year 2021, there were no "as built" NSR permits issued.
6. Did you issue any waivers or variances allowing a source to
commence construction prior to receiving a permit?
a. For any PSD projects? If so, how many?
Response: For the past three calendar years (2019, 2020, and 2021) there were
no variances for PSD projects allowing construction prior to receiving a
permit.
To note, NDEE did issue a variance for Western Sugar which is a major
source under the NSR program; the project itself was not considered a
major modification (replacement of coal fired boilers with natural gas fired
boilers)
b. For any major source non-attainment projects? If so, how
many?
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska.
c. For any synthetic minor NSR projects? If so, how many?
Response: For the past three calendar years (2019, 2020, and 2021) there were
15 variances for synthetic minor projects allowing construction prior to
receiving a permit.
d. For any true minor NSR projects? If so, how many?
Response: For the past three calendar years (2019, 2020, and 2021) there were
14 variances for true minor projects allowing construction prior to
receiving a permit.
7. What is the average time, in months, it takes you to issue the following
types of permits, starting from the time the application was determined
complete?
a. PSD permits?
Response: The PSD permits are issued within 12 months of receipt of application as
prescribed in Title 129 Chapter 19.
b. Nonattainment major NSR permits?
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska.
5
-------
c. Non-major/synthetic and minor permits?
Response: The non-major/synthetic and minor permits are typically issued within 120-
150 days after deemed technically complete.
d. "As built" permits?
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska.
8. Please provide an Excel spreadsheet listing all of the NSR projects
permitted in the three calendar years preceding the program review. For
example, if the review takes place in 2007, include data for calendar years
2004, 2005, and 2006. To the extent available, include 1) the source
name, 2) general location, 3) general description of project, 4) standard
industrial classification code (SIC), 5) date application received, 6) date
permit issued, 7) the type of permit issued, 8) any identification codes (e.g.
AFS source number, project number, permit number) that facilitate
retrieval of the permit record, and 9) any NSPS, NESHAP, or MACT
subparts triggered by the project. Also identify all projects where the
permit was issued after the project had already commenced construction.
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska.
3. Effective Permit Writing
Do your NSR permits:
Y X N ~ 1. Identify each emissions unit regulated?
Y X N ~ 2. Establish emissions standards or other operational limits that must be
met, including appropriate averaging times for numeric limits?
YXND 3. Include specific methods for determining compliance and excess
emissions, including reporting, record keeping, monitoring, and testing
requirements?
YXND 4. Outline procedures necessary to maintain continuous compliance with
emission limits?
YXND 5. Establish specific, clear, concise, and enforceable permit conditions?
YXND 6. Include conditions necessary for a source to avoid otherwise applicable
requirements {e.g., keeping a modification "minor")?
6
-------
7. Describe the consequences, if any, for failing to meet any permit limit
taken to avoid a substantive requirement (e.g. an emission cap taken to
avoid PSD, a number-of-hours restriction to avoid more stringent BACT)?
If so, describe the nature of the permit condition and what those
consequences might be.
Response: isequemces of failing to meet any permit limit taken is determined
by our Air Compliant m in accordance with the 2014 High Priority
Violation an I-! II ¦ derail* II ¦ portable Violations policies for reportable
violations.
Y X N ~ 8. Establish the "enabling legislative" and "legal" basis to issue and
enforce the conditions of the permit?
4. Project Discovery System
As a permitting program matures, it should have a comprehensive system
in place for informing potential applicants about the NSR permitting
process and for assuring that the bulk of applicants obtain permits prior to
construction. "As built" permits, for example, are an indicator of gaps in
this discovery system.
1. What steps does your program take to inform sources of the need to
obtain permits prior to commencing construction?
Response: Members of the Small Business Environmental Assistance Program
(SIBEAIP) based in the agency's PIG office publishes and updates the
permit matrix, a comprehensive excel file of permits, resource and
guidance documents, and regulations adopted by the NDEE This
reference provides supporting information and documents to assist new
permittees in understanding which permits are needed prior to
construction, including Air.
lallll Business Public Assistance Program staff host scoping (initial
project interviews) and one stop permit meetings which include
discussions with potential permittees, consultants, outside agencies and
organizations that have state level requirements or permits sepaira i
'ouglhi these meetings we educate and inform others to increase
awareness of the prerequisites required prior to permit application
submittals including those related to air programs.
program has published guidance documents such as **Aiir Quality
Construction Permits", "What is Potential to Emit", etc.
program has participated in and individually hosted stakeholder
meetings, presented at conferences, conducted webinars, and answers
individual emails and phone calls during the project development phase;
i site selection to equipment selection and construction
7
-------
commencement. The staff that respond to these requests for information
are aware of the need for sources to obt; , eirniit prior to the start of a
construction, modification or reconstruction project,.
Targeted stakeholder meetings with industry professionals, consultants,
engineers, contractors, and regulated facilities have occurred that
continue to "get the word out" about needing an Air permit prior to
construction,.
2. Do you work with other agencies, for example economic development,
zoning, or code departments to learn about the potential for new projects?
If so, please describe.
Respoin s a "Grow Nebraska Team" that specifically focuses on
processes for new project permittees,. We host one-stop meetings within
lays of a request,,
braska Department of Economic Development is a member of the
Grow Nebiraslh m with set meetings that occur quarterly,. During
project scoping, coordination occurs betwec and NDED and
includes local municipalities when relevant,. We have reached out to
additional organizations at the local (Boards of supervisors, city council's,
economic development districts, and other state level agencies and
organizations to support and communicate needs for meeting regulatory
requirements,,
3. Do you act on other information you might gather through newspaper articles
or other trade press announcements?
If so, please describe.
Respoin Ibliic Information Office within the agency receives daily news
updates through a news subscriber service. There have been several
instances where these news articles and press announcements have
generated communications, follow up discussions and meetings with new
or prospective businesses or activities involving agency related
environmental regulations and permits.
B. Staff and Training
1. What is the total number of staff dedicated to permitting for your NSR
program? Please provide an organizational chart.
Response: As of M 22, there are 10 NDEE staff members dedicated to Air
Construction Permitting. Please refer to Appendix A.
8
-------
2. For your NSR permitting program, please show a breakdown of staff
by different job functions {e.g., number of modelers, review engineers,
technicians, environmental scientists, clerical, supervisory, enforcement).
Response: jakdown of staff by different job function as follows:
Supervisor aff);
1- Division Administrator
1 - Section Supervisor
Engineers (6 staff)
Modellers (2 staff)
Clerical (1 staff)
3. Using the organizational chart provided above, please indicate the
number of years of experience for each person involved with the NSR
permitting program and summarize the total years of experience for your
program.
Response: Supervisor aff):
Division Administrator: 29 years
Section Supervisor: 1 year itlhis (in the role previous permit
writing and private sector experience)
Engineers (5 staff)
Engineer no. 1: 3.5 years
Engineer no. 2: 3 years
Engineer no. 3: 3 years
Engineer ir onths
Engineer no. 5: 1 month
Engineer no. 6: 2 weeks
Modellers (2 staff)
Modeller no. 1: sairs
Modeller no. 2: mtlhis
Clerical (1 staff)
Administrative Assistan ears
Y ~ N X 4. Does the department hire consultants or use other non-departmental
staff to assist in permitting activities?
If yes, explain the scope of these activities including the types of projects
reviewed, the fraction of time spent as a percentage of total resources
dedicated to the state NSR program, the approximate cost to the
department and whether these costs are recovered through permit fees.
Y X N ~ 5. Does staff turnover affect the ability of the department to issue timely
permits?
If so, does the department have any initiatives underway to reduce the
level of turnover?
9
-------
Response:
Y N X
Offering Tuition assistance, flexible schedules, competitive benefits
package.
6. Is the NSR program fully funded and staffed?
If not, please indicate the current level of staffing (e.g. 80% staffed with 16
of 20 positions filled).
Respon . 111 | gram is fulk funded; there is currently 1 vacant position
within the Air Construction Permit Section (85% staffed with 6 out 7
positions filled).
7. Please describe your training program for new and existing staff that
work on NSR permitting and issues. List any materials you use or training
courses you try to attend.
Response: New Staff:
has training divided into 3 progressive sections until the engineer
assigned >> i-ioject including .« I ' ek Air 101 training that contains many
permitting elements.
New and Existing Staff:
new and existing staff participate in available Central States Air
Resource Agencies iSAIIKA) training and use customized and
standard permit formats as well as standardized permit conditions
whenever possible
Permitting staff also meet on a routine basis to give presentations on
specific subjects that v, ill 11> lip improve permitting piactices as well as
discuss permitting challenges. I s completed process improvement
activities to help improve our applications, factsheets and permits. se
processes have resulted in streamlining our work to be able to complete
and issue permits quicker and has improved our final product.
encourages staff to make facility visits while working on their
projects if to help them better understand their projec th new and
existing staff is required to cample minimum of 30 hours of training per
calendar year relevant to their position.
Each new and existing staff has a dedicated 1:1 with Section Supervisor
on a weekly basis to discuss projects aside from any other time needed.
Existing staff is paired iting monthly basis with team members
from the Operatin nit Section to respond to hotline email/phone calls;
this promotes ciro: ling between the two programs
8. Describe any additional training that you believe would be beneficial.
Y X N I a. Would it be helpful if EPA provided more NSR training?
10
-------
Respon . , , training that could be provide - I» III - >>i a rotating basis at the four
states in Regi wild be helpful for staff; state specific topics could
be discus; different types of industry permitting, etc). Such
training sessions could be record* " d be accessible to others to
participate that could not attend.
Y X N ~ 9. Do you provide NSR program training opportunities for the public,
including the regulated community?
If yes, please describe.
Response: I provides training to the public on a number of topics based on
needs, this includes the NSR program, IN ID IE IE recently conducted
webmars that included the regulated community on the NSR Minor
program and General Construction Permits,
C. NSR Implementation
Y X N I 1. Do you implement EPA issued program guidance and policy for NSR?
If not, please explain.
Y X N ~ 2. Are you familiar with EPA's web-based NSR Policy & Guidance
Database < http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/policy/search.htm >
and do you use it?
Y ~ N X 3. Does the department implement any NSR-related policies or guidance
that deviate substantially from EPA's?
a. If yes, do you seek peer review from staff, applicants, EPA and
the public when developing the policy or guidance document?
b. How do you make these documents available to staff,
applicants, EPA, and the public?
4. In general, how do you learn about rule changes in the Federal NSR
program?
Y X N ~ a. Do you use EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ to monitor
NSR program changes and implementation issues?
Response: II ill "II II use nrTiad of resources to keep current on rule changes for the
NSR program such as: Region VII Nebraska Coordinator, monthly
Nebraska and Region VII calls, quarterly four states and Region VII calls,
eirall Register update emails, CenSARA and National Association of
Clean Air Agency (NACCA) cc se calls.
11
-------
D. Public Participation
1. What criteria are used to determine if a permit is public noticed?
Response: II ill «ll II utilizes criteria prescribed in Title 129, Chaptei l 1 i 1 jtermine if a
permit is public noticed,
2. Identify which of the following types of permits are noticed:
Y X N I a. PSD permits
Y ~ N ~ b. major nonattainment NSR permits
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska,
Y X N I c. synthetic minor permits
Y X N I d. minor permits
Y X N I 3. Do you publish notices on draft NSR permits in a newspaper of general
circulation?
Y X N I 4. Do you use a state or other publication designed to give general public
notice?
If yes, please describe.
Response: , all public notices are posted on NDEE s website The website
address is http //dee ne aov/Press nsf/PNall xsp
Y N X 5. Do you have procedures for notifying the public when major NSR
permit applications are received?
Response: Permit applications are filed in our electronic system and available to the
public via our public portal.
All public records for each permitted facility in Nebraska can be obtained
by accessing their electronic file by going to NDEE s website The
instructions are below;
Ility-related documents have been imaged into the State of
Nebraska's Enterprise Content Management systei )M) since April
2<" l l 111- II 1 M is the repository of official facilih i - cords that are created
or received by the agency Documents that have been scanned into the
I ¦ 171 are available to review from our Pulblliit I '¦ cords Search
use this option, you will need to know the facility number and program.
i'ii can call !<" ( l > >7 or email ndee.irecoirds@nelbiraska.gov to
obtain a facility number for a records search. The search will return a
maximum of up to 500 of til i- 11 r st recent document 11i- date fields are
12
-------
optional for a records search, unless a message appears stating you need
to narrow your search to view additional documents, then dates will be
required to view older documents.
Y X N I 6. Do you develop a mailing list of interested parties for NSR permit
actions {e.g., public officials, concerned environmentalists, citizens)?
If yes, how does someone get on the list?
Response: 11 c list includes the affected states and tribes witl hi i 111 iilles of the
source that is being permitted.
Y X N I 7. Aside from methods described above, do you use other means for
public notification?
If yes, what are they {e.g., post notices on your webpage, email)?
Response: All public notices are posted on I sbsite. The website address is
http://dee.ne. gov/Press. nsf/PNall.xsp.
Y X N I 8. Do your public notices clearly state when the public comment period
begins and ends?
9. What is your opinion on the most effective ways to provide public
notice?
Response: I 3bsite
Y N X 10. Do you provide notices in languages besides English?
If yes, in which languages?
Y N X 11. Have you ever been asked by the public to extend a public comment
period?
If yes, did you grant the extension?
If not, please explain why you didn't grant the extension?
12. What percentage (approximately) of your major NSR permits are
revised due to public comments?
Response: In general, I ill «ll II ¦ »)es not receive public onim- nts on proposed permit
actions. The last permit subject to PSD review (major modification) was
issued on 12/28/18 and no comments were received.
13. If a draft permit is revised, what criteria do you use to determine if a
permit should be re-issued in draft?
13
-------
Response: A significant change suit" , emitted limit relaxation or decrease in
monitoring would result in ire-public noticing the permit documents,
14. What type of comments or other concerns trigger a public hearing?
Response: II quested by the public, a public hearing is triggered,
15. How are public hearings noticed?
a. How much notice is given?
Response: Public hearings are noticed in accordance with "Till , Chapter 14 (30-
day notice is given),
16. What is your process for the public to obtain permit-related
information (such as permit applications, draft permits, deviation reports,
monitoring reports) especially during the public comment period?
Response: All public notice draff permit documents are available electronically
through the I ctironic records system that can be accessed at
http //dee ne aov/Press nsf/PNall xsc Deir copies are requested,
would charge for them,
Y X N ~ 17. Do you have a website for the public to get permit-related
documents?
If yes, please answer the following:
a. What is available online? I ed application, all
correspondence between the source an while drafting the
permit, draft documents, etc,
b. How often is the website updated? Continuously, the records
are usually available to the public after seven days of receipt.
c. Is there information on how the public can be involved? The
public notice documents will give information on how the public can
be involved in the permitting process,
Y ~ N X 18. Do you provide training to citizens on public participation in NSR?
If yes, approximately how many training opportunities have been provided
in the last five years?
19. How do you notify affected States (including tribes) of draft major
source permits? Affected States (including tiribi itified via email,
Y ~ N X 20. Do public notices for PSD permits specifically state the amount of
increment consumed?
14
-------
Y X N ~ 21. Are public notices for PSD permits sent to each party identified in 40
CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv)?
E. Program Benefits
Y X N l 1. In your opinion, is the NSR program (both PSD and nonattainment
Major NSR) an incentive to reduce emissions below major source levels?
Y X N I 2. In your opinion, have NSR permits been used as the authority to
implement other priorities such as toxic emission reductions and improved
monitoring and reporting?
Y X N ~ 3. In your opinion, does the case-by-case nature of a NSR permit allow
you to implement emission reducing programs or controls more quickly
than rulemaking?
Y X N ~ 4. In your opinion, does the NSR program provide communities a
mechanism to be involved in improving their own air quality?
Y X N ~ 5. In your opinion, has the PSD program contributed to sustaining good
air quality?
Y X N ~ 6. In your opinion, have the nonattainment Major NSR requirements
contributed to reducing emissions or avoiding emissions increases in
nonattainment areas?
II. Major NSR Permitting
A. Applicability
1. Stationary Source Determinations
Y ~ N X 1. Do your SIP-approved rules define stationary source differently than 40
CFR 51.165 or 51.166?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 2. When determining if emissions units are contiguous or adjacent, do
you assess whether emissions units under common ownership or control
may be a single stationary source regardless of the distance between the
emissions units?
If yes, please explain.
15
-------
Response:
follows the EPA guidance on criteria to determine sites are
contiguous or adjacent.
Y X N ~ 3. Do you assess facilities' financial, personnel, and contractual
relationships to determine common ownership or control?
Y X N ~ 4. Do you assess whether sources with different first two-digit SIC codes
{i.e., emissions units not in the same industrial grouping) may qualify as
separate stationary sources?
2. PTE Calculations
1. How do you determine if emissions factors {e.g., AP-42) are acceptable
for NSR applicability purposes?
Response: Emission factors are reviewed by the permit writer to determine if it is
acceptable for NSR applicability purposes. Emission factors are rated in
accordance with accuracy; in general, they are rat " st accurate to
least accurate as follows::
1 Source-specific emissions:
a. Any test method or procedure identified in Clhiapte
b. Continuous emission monitor (CEM) data, provided that:
1 M operation is in compliance with all applicable
requirements and applicable requirements under the Act;
2. Where source-specific emission data are not available, the
following may be used:
a. Any applicable method identified in til , llatiion of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, Vollui stationary Point and
Area Sources, IFii tion.
b. Any applicable method identified in I tor Information
Retrieval System Versit Jirce Classification Codes
and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Air Pollutants, EPA-
¦/R-95-012, August 1995; or
c. Material mass balance.
Y X N ~ 2. Does the department routinely require sources to document whether
emissions factors are appropriate and representative of emissions from
the actual emission unit being permitted?
If yes, how is this information documented in the permit record.
If no, please explain why such documentation is not made.
Response: Emission factors are evaluated for appropriateness and being
representative of emissions from the actual emission unit being permitted
for each project,. The information is documented in the calculation sheets
and the narratives that are a part of the fact sheet that accompany each
permit,.
16
-------
Y X N ~ 3. Do you include PM10 condensible emissions in the total amount of PM10
emissions when determining NSR applicability, BACT/LAER evaluations,
PSD increment consumption, and compliance with the NAAQS?
YX N I a. When PM 10 testing is required do you include a permit condition
that requires testing and specifies testing methods for PM10
condensibles?"
Response: , rmit condition specifies PM10 condensable to be tested if applicable
to the emissions pro' ie permit establishes testing conditions that the
facility must follow, which include submittal of testing protocol that
evaluates the acceptable testing methods for the pollutant being tested.
3. Fugitive Emissions
1. Please provide your regulatory definition of "fugitive" emissions for
major NSR applicability purposes.
Response: In accordance with Title 129, Chapter 1, Section 062 "Fugitive emissions"
means those emissions which could not reasonably pass through a stack,
chimney, vent, or other functionally equivalent opening,
Y X N ~ 2. Do you make a distinction between "fugitive" emissions and
"uncontrolled" emissions?
If yes, please explain.
Response: Uncontrolled emissions can include fugitives if they come from an
emission unit that does have controls associated with it. Uncontrolled
emissions are emitted while a unit is operating without any practical
enforceable lliimitations.
Y X N I 3. Do you include fugitive emissions in major NSR applicability
determinations for new sources?
Response: I itive emissions are included if the new source is under the source
categories prescribed in Titll napteir 2, Section 002.
Y X N I a. For modified sources?
If yes, please explain.
Response: I itive emissions are included if the new source is under the source
categories prescribed in Titll napteir 2, Section 002.
Y X N ~ 4. Do you allow major sources to use reductions in fugitive emissions for
netting purposes?
If yes, please describe how you determine the fugitive emissions
"baseline" used for netting.
Response: I Itive emissions reductions are taking into consideration based on the
17
-------
information provided by the facility in the application, an example of this is
silt loading testing results for haul roads, etc.
5. Please provide a description of your guidelines or calculation
methodology used to quantify fugitive emissions.
Respon . I n >itive emissions calculations follow AP-42 methods - haul road
equations, pile erosion, tanks, etc), I protocol for equipment leak
emission estimate 5017), etc.
Y X N ~ 6. Do your permits contain conditions for fugitive emissions consistent
with requirements for BACT/LAER {i.e., specific emission limits, control
methods, and/or work practice standards)?
4. Debottlenecking/Increased Utilization
Y X N ~ 1. When determining if proposed modifications are subject to major NSR,
do you include emissions increases from existing emissions units that are
not physically modified {i.e., units that will be debottlenecked or have
increased utilization such as boilers)?
2. What method is used to determine the emissions increase from these
emissions units?
a. What EPA guidance do you consider for this issue?
Response: II ill «l II evaluates emission increases that are associated witl i .> | hioject
regardless of t is not physically modified. For sources that are
considered a single source under the NSR program, I aluates the
changes in emissions from the project at all the facilities that fall under the
single source to determine project impas es the 1990 draft
NSR workshop manual as well as other I . iblications
(debottlenecking) in these determinations.
Y X N I 3. Do you train your permitting staff to include such emissions increases
when determining if a modification is major for NSR?
5. Netting
Y X N I 1. Is netting approved in your NSR SIP for determining whether
modifications at major stationary sources are subject to major NSR (PSD
or nonattainment Major NSR, as applicable)?
If not, please explain.
18
-------
Y X N ~ 2. What is the contemporaneous time period for netting in your SIP?
Response: As prescribed in Title 129,Chapter 19, Sect
"009.01 An increase or decrease in actual emissions is contemporaneous
with the increase from the project for which an emissions increase has
been calculated in section 008 only if it occurs between the date five years
before the source begins actual construction (as defined in Chapter 1,
Section 023) of the project and the date that the increase from the project
occurs,"
Y X N ~ 3. For determining the baseline from which emission reductions are
calculated, do you require the applicant to submit the actual emissions
from the units along with any permit limits that apply?
Y ~ N X 4. Do you allow an applicant to receive emission reduction netting credit
for reducing allowable emissions instead of actual emissions?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 5. Do you allow an applicant to receive emission reduction credit for
reducing any portion of actual emissions that resulted because the source
was operating out of compliance?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 6. Do you allow an applicant to receive emission reduction credit for an
emissions unit that has not been constructed or operated?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 7. Are emissions reductions to meet MACT requirements eligible for
netting credits?
If yes, under what conditions? (See EPA's November 12, 1997 memo
from John Seitz entitled "Crediting of Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) Emission Reductions for New Source Review (NSR)
Netting and Offsets".)
Y X N I 8. When any emissions decreases are claimed as part of a proposed
modification, do you require that all stationary, source-wide, creditable and
contemporaneous emissions increases and decreases of the pollutant be
included in the major NSR applicability determination?
If not, please explain.
19
-------
9. To avoid "double counting" of emissions reductions, what process do
you use to determine if emissions reductions considered for netting have
already been relied upon in issuing a major NSR permit for the source?
Response: I evaluates the facility's permitting history (including no permit
required projects) to determine if reductions have been relied upon in
issuing a major NSR permit,
Y ~ N X 10. Do you have a process to track projects that use credits to net out of
major NSR?
If yes, please explain.
Y X N ~ 11. Do you require that emissions reductions (e.g., reductions from unit
shutdowns) must be enforceable to be creditable for netting?
If not, please explain.
YD NX 12. Have you had public concerns regarding the netting analysis and
procedures used for any issued permits that avoided major NSR?
If yes, please describe.
Y ~ N X 13. Do you allow inter-pollutant trading when netting (e.g., allow a source
to use NOx or PM credits for netting out of VOC increases)?
If yes, please explain.
14. What process do you have to verify that a source's emissions
reductions considered for netting, including emissions reductions that may
have been "banked," are not already used by the source, or another
source, as nonattainment Major NSR offsets?
Respon evaluates the facility's permitting history (including no permit
required projects) to determine if reductions have been relied upon in
issui >r NSR permit.
B. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permitting
1. BACTDeterminations
Y X N ~ 1. Do you require permit applicants to use the "top-down" method for
determining BACT?
If no, what approach do you require?
Y X N ~ 2. Do you commonly use information resources other than the
RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse to identify control options, costs, etc.?
20
-------
If yes, what resources do you commonly use and rate the usefulness of
each one?
Response: Depending on the project and readily available resources in the
Clearinghouse publications, I valuates similar projects permitted
within the State, other states within I »n Villi as well as other states
if the i¦ .in- ii 1-1 similar projects withing the Regii ii II ill «l II i nilizes vendor
information specific to the project, utilizes I in Villi resources to
ask questions, etc,
Y X N ~ 3. Do you provide a detailed documentation/explanation of draft BACT
determinations in the public record?
Y X N ~ 4. In your public record for draft BACT determinations, do you provide an
economic rationale if a BACT option is rejected as being prohibitively
expensive?
5. What procedures do you use to calculate baseline emission rates for
calculation of cost effectiveness values?
Response: II ill "III evaluates the baseline emissions ba 1 nil ctober 1990
NSIR Workshop Manual (Secti : Effectiveness), The IN ID IE IE
evaluates emission rates based on the following:
1. Source-specific emissions:
a. Any test method or procedure identified in ¦ 1 iapte i l >
b. Continuous emission monitor (CEM) data, provided that:
the CEM operation is in compliance with all applicable
requirements and applicable requirements under the Act;
2. Where source-specific emission data are not available, the
following may be used:
a. Any applicable method identified in t npilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, Vollui Stationary Point and
Area Sources, Fifth Edition;
b. Any applicable method identified in I tor Information
Retrieval System Veirsii Jirce Classification Codes
and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Air Pollutants, EPA-
454/R-95-012, August 1995; or
c. Material mass balance,
a. What do you view as "uncontrolled" emissions?
Response: II ill "II II evaluates the baseline emissions based on I I !'ctobeir 1990
NSIR Workshop Manual (Secti : Effectiveness),
Uncontrolled emissions for BACT purposes are emissions that do not
have control devices associated with them, or other control equipment
required by a State and Federal regulations. Controls which are inherent
to the process could be considered in calculating uncontrolled emissions.
21
-------
YX N
6. Do you consider combinations of controls when identifying and ranking
BACT options {e.g., low organic solvent coatings plus thermal oxidation)?
7. Do you ever re-group the emissions units included in a cost evaluation
in either of the following ways?
Y X N ~ a. If an applicant's approach is to evaluate the cost of controlling
each unit separately, do you ever consider combining units for
control by one control device?
Y X N I b. If an applicant combines all units for control by one control
device and concludes this approach is too expensive, do you ever
consider controlling individual units or a small group of units that
have the greatest percentage of total emissions?
Y X N ~ 8. Do your PSD permits specify emissions limits and control methods
consistent with the basis (and capabilities) of the selected BACT options?
9. How do you establish the compliance averaging times for BACT
emissions limits?
Response: Compliance averaging times aire consistent with how the emission
limitations aire measured in test methods. Annual rolling averages versus
shorter term averages are evaluated on a case-by-case basis depending
on the project. NDEE utilize and internal guidance when
determining appropriateness of a compliance averaging times for emission
limitations,,
Y X N I 10. Do you make sure that permit conditions impose restrictions
consistent with BACT evaluation assumptions? {e.g., if the annual
emissions used in a BACT cost evaluation are based on an assumption of
less than continuous operation and/or operation at less than maximum
capacity, do permit conditions contain limits based on the assumption
used?)
2. BACT Cost Evaluations
Y N X 1. Do you allow deviation from EPA's recommended cost evaluation
procedures?
If yes, please explain.
2. Do you place primary reliance on total or incremental cost
effectiveness values?
Response: ill cost effectiveness values (cost per ton of pollutant).
22
-------
a. If you give greatest (or equal) weight to incremental costs, what
is your basis for doing so?
3. Do you place primary reliance on a comparative cost approach or a
"bright line" test?
Response: Comparative cost approach,,
Y ~ N X 4. If you place greatest importance on a comparative cost approach, do
you try to obtain cost data for projects outside your permitting jurisdiction?
5. If you use what can be described as a "bright line" test, what is the
basis of your "bright line" cost effectiveness value and do you change the
value over time to account for inflation?
Y ~ N X 6. Do you use a different cost approach for different pollutants?
If yes, please explain.
7. Under what circumstances do you conduct a BACT cost evaluation
independent of the cost evaluation provided by the applicant? (An
independent evaluation could entail obtaining additional vendor quotes.)
Response: I does not generally conduct a BACT cost evaluation independent of
the cost evaluation provided by the applicant,. The IN D IE IE may request
information from the vendor on cost if that is not explicit on the analysis;
another circumstance is if the figures are not consistent with B/ )st
evaluations that were conducted for similar controls for pollutants that
were analyzed within the same tiir ne
Y ~ N X 8. Are cost estimates required to be referenced to a common base year
{e.g., 1998) so that cost estimates can be easily compared?
Y ~ N X 9. Are other agencies contacted to determine if their cost estimates need
to be normalized before comparisons can be made?
Y X N ~ 10. Do you perform a BACT assessment for all new/modified emissions
units or activities emitting a pollutant subject to PSD review, no matter
how small the emissions from an affected unit or activity?
Y X N ~ 11. Do you consider increases or decreases in corollary toxic/hazardous
air pollutants as part of a BACT evaluation? [This question addresses
implementation of EPA's "North County Resource Recovery Remand"
memo dated September 22, 1987.]
If yes, please give a specific example.
Response: No specific examples as I id not have any applications that deal
with corollary toxics and HAIPs as part of a BACT evaluation,.
23
-------
YX N
Response:
YX N
Response:
Y N X
Y N X
YX N
YX N
12. Do you provide BACT evaluation training to new (or newly-assigned)
new source review (NSR) permitting staff (other than on-the-job training)?
If yes, describe the nature of the training provided.
Staff has attended NSR training provided by CenSARA, other forms of
training including review )ctobeir's 1990 Draft NSR Workshop
Manual, looking into other permitting actions that contained BACT
analysis, 12-week Air 101 training that contains NSR permitting elements,
etc.
13. Do you provide BACT evaluation refresher training to experienced
NSR permitting staff?
If yes, how frequently do you provide this training and what is the nature of
the training provided?
Staff has attended NSR training provided by CenSARA, other forms of
training including reviewing EPA October's 1990 Draft NSR Workshop
Manual, looking into other permitting actions that contained BACT
analysis, 12-week Air 101 training that contains NSR permitting elements
etc. Management regularly assesses training opportunities and staff is
encouraged to attend training as it becomes available.
14. Do you provide an information outreach program on BACT
evaluations for owners of regulated sources?
If yes, how frequently do you provide such information and how do you
provide it?
15. Do you provide an information outreach program on BACT
evaluations to the public?
If yes, how frequently do you provide such information and how do you
provide it?
16. Do you enter each BACT determination in the RACT/BACT/LAER
Clearinghouse?
17. Before establishing BACT as work practice, design, or operational
standards, do you determine that emissions limits {e.g., Ibs/mmBTU,
Ibs/hr) are not feasible?
If no, please explain.
24
-------
Y X N ~ 18. Do you apply BACT to fugitive emissions?
If no, please explain.
3. Additional Impacts (soils, vegetation, visibility, growth)
Y ~ N X 1. Do your PSD application forms specifically require information
regarding additional impacts?
If yes, include a copy of the forms.
Y X N ~ 2. If no, do you require applicants to submit sufficient information
necessary to complete an additional impact analysis?
3. What resources do you use for researching additional impacts?
Response: , rmit applicant is expected to provide data in regard to additional
impact analysis f«-i .«| hioject as outline in II ill «ll II 1 II !« and Minor Source
Modelling Guidance" available at
http://dee.ne.gov/publica.nsf/PubsForm.xsp?documentld=84D0237BF482
D862581940067B0CA&action=openDocument.
Some of the tools that aire used for researching additional impacts are (i)
eirall Land Manager's Air Quality Related Values Work Group (FLAG)
IPIhia , irt and (ill) Screening procedure for the impacts of air
pollution sources on plants, soils, and animals: Final Report
Y ~ N X 4. Do you include environmental justice issues in your analysis?
Y ~ N X 5. Has an additional impact analysis in the last 5 years been a cause for
concern in an issuance of a PSD permit?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 6. Do you generally allow arguments that the protection of the NAAQS will
assure protection of vegetation?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N X 7. Do you require that predicted short-term impacts {e.g., one hour NOx
impacts) be used to assess impacts on vegetation for pollutants which do
not have short term ambient standards?
If no, please explain.
Respon understanding is that if there are no short-term ambient standards
f( , irticular pollutant, such pollutant will not be required to demonstrate
short term impacts on vegetation.
25
-------
Y X N ~ 8. Regarding visibility impacts, do you require assessments for vistas
{e.g., parks, airports) near the proposed source or modification?
If no, please explain.
4. Preconstruction Monitoring
Y X N ~ 1. Do you have formal preconstruction monitoring requirements?
Response: Preconstruction monitoring requirements aire specified in
and Minor Source Modelling Guidance available on tlh ; website at:
http://dee.ne.gov/publica.nsf/PubsForm.xsp?documentld=84D0237BF482
D862581940067B0CA&action=openDocument
Y ~ N X 2. Do you have a formal public participation process regarding
requirements for preconstruction monitoring for specific proposed
projects?
Y ~ N X 3. Have you ever consulted with the Federal Land Manager (FLM)
regarding preconstruction monitoring requirements for a proposed source
or modification?
Y ~ N X 4. In the last five years have you ever required an applicant applying for a
PSD permit to conduct preconstruction ambient monitoring or
meteorological monitoring?
Y ~ N X 5. Do you have a formal approval/denial process at the conclusion of
preconstruction monitoring?
Y ~ N X 6. Do you have a formal process during preconstruction monitoring for
resolving conflicts between the FLM and the applicant?
If yes, please explain.
Y X N ~ 7. Do you routinely provide ambient monitoring data in lieu of requiring
applicants to perform preconstruction monitoring?
If yes, please briefly describe the monitoring network used and the basis
for the monitoring value selected.
Response: II ill «ll II utilizes dai.> ii> ¦in illie agency's ambient air monitoring stations; the
basis for the monitoring value selected is with accordance with the NAAQs
and other relevant regulations. Ambient air concentrator nitored
values) are directly measured and use 3-year averages as per regulation.
Modelled impacts are forecasted, predicted values, and use a 5-year met
data set to capture the worst possible meteorological conditions.
26
-------
Background concentrations determined by monitored 3-year averages are
added to the predicted modelled impacts to capture concentrations
attributable to natural sources, unidentified sources in the vicinity of the
project, and regional transport contributions from distant sources,
Y X N ~ 8. Do you follow EPA guidance {e.g., siting, equipment, data validation,
audits) regarding collection of preconstruction monitoring data?
9. Under what circumstances would you require post construction
ambient monitoring as a condition of a PSD permit?
Response: I would consider requiring post construction ambient monitoring as a
condition of > II ! 11 unit c 11 .> - . lse-by-case basis; this would be
determined while drafting the permit based on compliance margins,
location of the facility, citizen's concerns, etc, II ill «ll II i- 'Hows the II II -l
Ambient Monitorii delines for Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(May 1987)
C. Nonattainment Major NSR Permitting
Response: I has been and is currently in attainment and with the NAAQS
has never issued nonattainment major NSR permits; therefore
section: III 11 ¦ i ill m )uglhi ¦' ! are not applicable at this time,
1. Offsets
Y ~ N ~ 1. Do you have an emissions "bank" for offsets?
If no, go directly to 10.
Y ~ N ~ 2. Is the bank a database used for emissions trading?
If yes, please explain how the trading works.
Y ~ N ~ 3. Do you, as the reviewing authority, control the trading of credits in the
"bank"?
If no, who controls the trading?
Y ~ N ~ 4. Are the credits certified "creditable" (including surplus for attainment
planning purposes and other Clean Air Act requirements) by you at time of
entry into the bank?
Y ~ N ~ 5. Are the credits evaluated and certified "creditable" (including currently
surplus) at the time of withdrawal and use?
If not, please explain.
27
-------
6. How long are the "offsets" valid from time of reduction?
Y ~ N ~ 7. Are the banked credits included in the attainment demonstration and
inventory as "real emissions" {i.e., emissions being emitted into the air)?
Y ~ N ~ 8. Are the banked credits used for NSR offsets only?
If not, what are the other uses?
Y ~ N ~ 9. Are the banked credits discounted with time?
If yes, please explain the discounting procedures.
10. How do you determine that the reductions being used are properly
included in the attainment demonstration?
Y ~ N ~ 11. Are the emissions reductions available for NSR offsets only allowed
from the same nonattainment area as the proposed source or
modification?
If not, please explain.
12. What procedures do you use to determine the baseline to quantify the
reductions?
a. How do you quantify the amount of creditable reduction?
Y ~ N ~ 13. Are the records for determining actual emissions available for review
by you?
Y ~ N ~ 14. Are copies of permits required as part of the permit application to
determine if the reductions from other sources being proposed as NSR
offsets are federally enforceable?
15. How do you verify that the reductions proposed for NSR offsets are
"surplus" to other Clean Air Act requirements and are "real," {i.e.,
reductions in emissions that were actually emitted into the air)?
16. What process do you use to verify that the reductions were not used
in a previously issued permit?
Y ~ N ~ 17. Do you allow inter-pollutant trading for NSR offsets?
If yes, please describe this trading procedure {e.g., pollutants allowed,
ratio of reductions required, eligibility criteria, etc.).
28
-------
Y ~ N ~ 18. For serious and severe ozone nonattainment areas do you allow
"internal offsets" instead of lowest achievable emissions rate (LAER)?
If yes, what is the offset ratio?
YDND 19. Do you allow credits used for netting to be used as nonattainment
Major NSR offsets?
YDND 20. Do your nonattainment Major NSR rules require the offset ratios
prescribed in the Clean Air Act?
If no, please explain what other ratios are used?
YDND 21. Do you require that applicants proposing to use NSR offsets include a
"net air quality benefit" modeling analysis as part of their permit
application?
If yes, please describe what information is required.
2. LAER Determinations
YDND 1. Do you require permit applicants to use a top-down approach to
determine the most stringent control option available for LAER?
If not, what approach do you require?
YDND 2. Do you require a permit applicant to identify all available control
options?
If yes, do you require the applicant to identify control options as being:
YDND a. Achieved in practice?
YDND b. Contained within the SIP of any other state or local reviewing
authority?
YDND c. Technologically feasible?
YDND d. Cost effective?
YDND 3. Do you use information sources other than the RACT/BACT/LAER
Clearinghouse to identify control options?
If yes, please describe what information sources you commonly use and
the usefulness of each?
29
-------
4. Please describe under what circumstances you would conduct a LAER
analysis independent of the analysis conducted by the permit applicant.
YDND 5. Do you submit your LAER determinations to the EPA's
RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse?
YDND 6. Do you consider technology transfer in your LAER determinations?
7. If you consider cost effectiveness in LAER determinations, please
describe the procedures used. (For example, describe the procedures
used to calculate the baseline emission rate in the cost effectiveness
determination.) For each criteria pollutant, provide the dollar/ton threshold
used to determine whether a control option is cost effective (and state
whether this is total or incremental cost).
YDND 8. Do you use a different cost approach for different pollutants?
If yes, please explain.
YDND 9. Do you provide detailed documentation or explanations of proposed
LAER determinations in the technical support document (TSD) or public
record?
YDND 10. Do you provide an economic rationale in the TSD or public record if a
LAER option is rejected as being prohibitively expensive?
YDND 11. Do you consider combinations of controls when identifying and
ranking LAER options?
YDND 12. Do you perform a LAER assessment for all new/modified emission
units or activities emitting a nonattainment pollutant subject to major NSR
review no matter how small the emissions from an affected unit or activity?
13. Please describe how your LAER analysis includes "time of"
considerations? (For example, if a new or modified source had
constructed without a permit and at a later time went through
nonattainment Major NSR review, would you consider LAER at the time of
permit issuance or at the time of emission unit construction/ modification?)
YDND 14. Do your permits contain conditions requiring specific emission limits/
control method conditions/work practice standards consistent with the
basis (and capabilities) of the selected LAER option?
15. Please describe how you establish compliance averaging times for
LAER emission limits.
30
-------
Y ~ N ~ 16. Do your permits contain conditions requiring emissions testing,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting so that inspectors and
enforcement personnel can easily determine compliance with LAER
requirements?
If not, please explain.
Y ~ N ~ 17. Do you ensure that permit conditions impose restrictions consistent
with the LAER determination? (For example, if emissions used in the
LAER determination are based on an assumption of less than continuous
operation and/or operation at less than maximum capacity, do permit
conditions contain limits/restrictions based on the assumptions used?)
18. Please describe how you incorporate public comments into your
LAER determinations.
Y ~ N ~ 19. Do you provide LAER evaluation training to new (or newly-assigned)
NSR permitting staff other than on-the-job training?
If yes, please describe the nature of the training provided.
Y ~ N ~ 20. Do you provide LAER evaluation refresher training to experienced
NSR permitting staff?
If yes, how frequently do you provide this training and what is the nature of
the training provided?
Y ~ N ~ 21. Do you provide an information outreach program on LAER
evaluations for owners or operators of regulated sources?
If yes, how frequently do you provide such information and how do you
provide it?
Y ~ N ~ 22. Do you provide an information outreach program on LAER
evaluations to the general public?
If yes, how frequently do you provide such information and how do you
provide it?
3. Alternatives Analysis
Y ~ N ~ 1. Does each nonattainment Major NSR permit action address the
alternatives analysis as required by section 173(a)(5) of the Clean Air Act?
Y ~ N ~ If yes, is this alternatives analysis a specific requirement of your
nonattainment Major NSR rules?
31
-------
Y ~ N ~ 2. Do you have criteria that would address the depth of analysis required
for a specific project?
Y ~ N ~ 3. Do you include project-specific environmental justice issues that are
raised as part of this analysis?
Y ~ N ~ 4. Do you know of any projects where this analysis resulted in changes to
proposed projects?
If yes, what changes resulted?
4. Compliance
YDND 1. Do you require the permit applicant to demonstrate that all major
stationary sources owned or operated by the applicant in your State are
subject to emission limitations and are in compliance, or on a schedule for
compliance, with all applicable emission limitations and standards?
2. Please describe the following:
a. the criteria used by an applicant in a statewide compliance
demonstration
b. when in the permitting process you require the applicant to
make the statewide compliance demonstration.
III. NSR Avoidance
A. RMRR (Routine Maintenance, Repair and Replacement) exemption
Y X N ~ 1. Do you have knowledge of (a) the EPA letter dated May 23, 2000, to
Henry Nickel of Hunton & Williams concerning Detroit Edison and (b) the
Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) case RMRR documents?
2. What other documents do you rely upon when making RMRR
exemption determinations?
Response: I utilizes documents published in EPA's New Source Review Policy
and Guidance Documents (https://www.epa.gov/nsr/routine~maintenance~
repair-and-replacement), similar RMRR determinations from different
agencies within and outside of EPA Region Villi, etc.
Y ~ N X 3. Do you have a formal protocol for making RMRR exemption
determinations?
If yes, describe the protocol.
32
-------
Response:
svaluates formal RMRR exemption request on a case-by-case
basis, A permit writer would be assigned to review determinations if
formally submitted to the agency.
4. Approximately how many formal RMRR exemption determinations
have you made in the last five years?
Response: None
a. Using any one such determination as an example, describe the
example, state the conclusion you reached, and discuss how you
reached the conclusion.
Response: Not applicable
Y X N ~ 5. Do you keep documentation of formal RMRR exemption
determinations?
Response: This determination would be kept in the electronic data base under the
facill d classified as such,
Y X N ~ 6. Do you restrict the RMRR exemption to units being modified and
exclude replacement of entire units from RMRR exemption consideration?
Y X N ~ 7. Regarding the "purpose" evaluation factor in an RMRR exemption
evaluation, do you exclude projects from the RMRR exemption that result
in an increase in production capacity?
8. Regarding the "frequency" evaluation factor in an RMRR exemption
evaluation, which of the following do you consider:
Y X N ~ a. the history of the specific unit(s) in question.
Y X N I b. the history of other similar units at the same facility.
Y X N ~ c. the history of similar units at other facilities in the same industry.
Y X N ~ d. some combination of these histories.
9. Regarding the "cost" evaluation factor in an RMRR exemption
evaluation, what procedure do you follow to take cost into account?
Response: This determination would be kept in the electronic data base under the
facill d classified as such,
Y X N ~ 10. Do you provide RMRR exemption evaluation training to NSR
permitting staff employees (other than on-the-job training)?
If yes, describe the nature of the training provided.
33
-------
Response: Staff has attended NSIR training provided by CemSAIRA, other forms of
training including reviewing EPA Octobei ir 90 Draft III ! « jrkshop
Manual an 1 > l >ek Air 101 training that contain i III ! permitting
elements. Management regularly assesses training opportunities and staff
is encouraged to attend training as it becomes available,
Y ~ N X 11. Do you provide an information outreach program on RMRR
exemption evaluations for owners of regulated sources?
If yes, how frequently do you provide such information and how do you
provide it?
B. PCP (Pollution Control Projects) Exemption
NOTE: Federal pollution control project (PCP) exemption rules and
policies were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia as of June 24, 2005. Please address the following questions for
projects approved prior to this decision.
Response: III i- re are no projects approved prior to Juir> 1 l 2005, therefore Section
II is not applicable,
Y ~ N ~ 1. Do you have standard permitting procedures or rules that allow for
certain changes at non-utility emissions units to be designated as PCP,
which are excluded from major NSR?
2. How many PCP exclusions have been granted for "feed" or "fuel"
switches?
3. What process do you use to determine if the project is "environmentally
beneficial" and not just "economically efficient"?
4. How are the collateral emission increases evaluated? Do you require a
modeling analysis to demonstrate insignificant impacts from emissions
increases?
5. How do you handle collateral increases in hazardous air pollutants
(HAP)?
Y ~ N ~ 6. Are the emission reduction credits from PCP available for netting or
NSR offsets? Please explain.
34
-------
7. Which add-on control devices are most frequently involved in PCP
exclusion requests?
8. Which types of industrial sources typically request PCP exclusions
from major NSR?
Y ~ N ~ 9. Does your NSR SIP include the PCP exclusion for electric utility steam
generating units (often referred to as the WEPCO exclusion)?
C. Circumvention/Aggregation
Y X N ~ 1. When you review a modification to determine if it is major for NSR, do
you consider aggregating prior minor emissions increases at the stationary
source?
2. Please provide any criteria you may use to determine if a series of
minor modifications or projects needs to be aggregated for NSR
applicability purposes?
Response: I utilizes EPA's guidance criteria of timing, technical dependence
and economic dependence to evaluate aggregation of projects in
accordance with rule making published in f eirall Registry on
11/15/18 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Aggregation;
Reconsideration),
Y X N ~ 3. When requests are made to permit new or modified emissions units as
separate minor changes over time, do you evaluate whether the
permitting process is purposely staged as minor when the changes are
really one permitting action subject to major NSR?
D. Synthetic Minor Permit Limits
Y ~ N X 1. Do you keep a list of synthetic minor sources {i.e., sources that would
otherwise be major for NSR but are considered minor because of
emissions limits or other limiting conditions in their permits) that is
available for review by the public and EPA?
If yes, please explain how.
2. Describe your formal process for establishing or designating a
synthetic minor source.
35
-------
Response: NDEE evaluates construction permit applications including PTE
calculations and the limitations proposed by the facility. Once evaluated
for technical accuracy and appropriateness with the regulations, the
limitations are prescribed as practical enforceable permit conditions that
ensures a source is synthetic minor for NSR purposes.
Y X N ~ 3. For synthetic minor sources, do your permits include enforceable limits
to keep the sources minor?
If not, please explain why.
4. Please describe how compliance with the synthetic minor limits is
tracked over time?
Response: Compliance with emission limitations to ensure synthetic minor status are
tracked in different ways depending on how the limitation was structured,
methods of tracking compliance with limitations are: CEMs, stack testing,
daily, monthly, 12-month rolling tracking, record keeping requirements,
material balances, etc. In addition, Air Compliance inspections are
conducted on a regular basis that verify if the facility is in compliance with
the limitations proposed in its synthetic minor permits.
Y X N ~ 5. Are you satisfied that your tracking activities are sufficient to ensure
that sources getting synthetic minor permits to avoid major NSR review
are not actually operating above the applicable major source threshold?
Y X N ~ 6. Do you include in your synthetic minor permits conditions requiring
sources to notify you if and when the major source threshold is reached?
Y ~ N X 7. Do you perform (or require) modeling for sources seeking synthetic
minor permits to determine impacts on PSD increments?
Y ~ N X 8. Do you consider visibility issues in Class I areas, if applicable, when
reviewing synthetic minor applications?
Y ~ N ~ 9. Do you include "prompt deviation" reporting requirements in synthetic
minor source permits?
If yes, how do you define "prompt deviation"?
Response: Any emissions due to malfunctions, unplanned shutdowns, and ensuing
start-ups that are, or may be, in excess of applicable emission limits shall
be reported to the NDEE in accordance with Title 129, Chapter 35,
Section 005. Reporting must be submitted within 48 of beginning of each
excess period.
36
-------
Y X N ~ 10. Do permit applications reviewed by your agency and permits issued
identify the requirements {e.g., PSD, nonattainment Major NSR, Title V,
NESHAP) being avoided by keeping the source minor?
E. Relaxation
1. Describe your knowledge of the "relaxation" regulatory provisions of 40
CFR 51,165(a)(5)(ii), 51,166(r)(2), and 52.21 (r)(4).
Response: I understands from the above referenced regulatory citations that if
there are relaxation of any limitations, that the project needs to be
evaluated as a new construction. If relaxation of limitations causes a
source to become major for NSR or a major modification as defined under
NSR the project needs to go through PSD review.
Relaxation of I juirements could also be considered pending
review and public participation,
2. What types of changes do you consider potentially subject to relaxation
assessments?
Response: Changes in production limitations, production capacity, hours of
operations, emission limitations, taxation of IBACT requirements
could also be considered pending review and public participation,
Y ~ N X 3. Do you have a written policy on relaxation assessments?
4. Approximately how many relaxation assessments have you made in
the last five years?
Response: I does not track relaxation assessments,
Y ~ N X 5. Do you include specific permit conditions to make potential future
relaxation possibilities more identifiable?
6. What is your understanding of the appropriate circumstances under
which an existing minor source is allowed a 100/250-tons-per-year
emissions increase without triggering relaxation provisions?
Response: A facility is alllowe 1 > ne time-doubling i l < >< >/25<111 i ihi its site without
going through PSD review for the project. After the one time doubling, the
source woi«ll>' I» .> in.)|or III ! * uirce and evaluated as such,
Y ~ N X 7. Do you provide relaxation evaluation training to NSR permitting staff
employees (other than on-the-job training)?
If yes, describe the nature of the training provided.
37
-------
Response: Staff has attended NSIR training provided by CemSAIRA, other forms of
training including reviewing EPA October's 1990 Draft NSIR Workshop
Manual, Management regularly assesses training opportunities and staff is
encouraged to attend training as it becomes available.
IV. Minor Source Construction Permitting
Program
Y X N ~ 1. Do you require monitoring or reporting requirements for minor sources?
a. If so, do you establish these requirements based on a rule or a
general policy of effective permit writing?
Response: Effective permit writing prescribes that for any limitation there needs to be
a monitoring and record keeping requirement to make the limitation
practically enforceable,
Y X N ~ 2. Does the application or permitting process require modeling for minor
sources?
Response: As indicated in I rent Modelling Guidance located at:
http://dee.ne.gov/publica.nsf/PubsForm.xsp?documentld=84D0237BF482
D862581940067B0CA&action=openDocument
Y X N ~ 3. Does your minor source permit program include a technology
component similar to BACT in the PSD program?
Response: 11 ¦ -t ate has .> I ¦ Jcs IBA I \ i >i mm i I lit- II'"' ¦ 'II iapteir 27), although it
only applies for HAIPs. If thresholds (10 TIPY comb. HAP/2 5 individual
HAIPs) are triggered for a project, T-BACT must be conducted for the
project; the analysis is similar to BACT in tlh , ogram.
Y X N ~ 4. Do you require minor sources with Federally applicable permit limits for
MACT, NSPS, or NESHAP to report compliance?
Response: I porting requirements in minor NSIR permits prescribe that
irepoirtiir t be in accordance with the applicable federal requirements.
V. Modeling
A. PSD Modeling
1. General
YXN
1. Do you follow EPA's modeling guidelines in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix
W?
38
-------
Y X N ~ 2. Are deviations from the modeling guidelines in Appendix W subjected
to public comment and submitted to the regional EPA office for approval?
Response: partment generally does not seek public comment when deviating
ii- ¦in Appendix W Mine i III ! * uirces modelling procedures follows App
W a "i as practical, however, minor sources do not perform MERP
analyses, model haul roads, or model I iss II Increments. For Major
NSR modelling, every attempt is made to conform to Appendix W
guidelines. The Department does submit i I I II gion i- -i approval for
any non-regulatory modeling options as per 3.? 1I '¦ quirement ¦ ii v).
Y X N ~ 3. Do you ask applicants to submit a modeling protocol for approval prior
to submitting modeling?
Y X N ~ 4. Is the protocol provided to other interested organizations {e.g., EPA,
Federal Land Manager)?
Response: Please note that Nebraska does not contain any Class I areas The
closest Class I areas outside of Nebraska are the Badlands and Wind
Cave, approximately 54-km and 55~h pectively, due north from the
Nebraska/South Dakota State border
Y X N I 5. Is the effect of downwash modeled if stacks are less than good
engineering practice (GEP) height?
Response: I 3~Prime is run for all modeling demonstrations, regardless of stack
heights,
Y X N I 6. Are modeling analyses available for public review?
Response: Modelling analyses are accessible from Nebraska Enterprise Content
Management Portal. The modeled impacts with a very brief discussion is
included th- ¦ I I t Sheet. Beginning in early 2022, th 1 III 1 t Sheet
expanded the modeled impact discussion by including more details on the
choice of background concentration, met data, any irregularities, such as
using the 2013 through 2017 Omaha area met date because both one-
minute and five-minute windspeed data are missing at least one-month of
records in both 2t11 , >i id 2<" I"11
Y X N I 7. Do you review modeling submittals to determine if option switches are
correct?
8. When off-site meteorological data are used, what years are typically
used?
Response: Most current; meteorological data is updated typically ev /ears.
39
-------
9. How do you train/re-train your modeling staff?
Response: Training includes attending AERMOD training classes offered by Trinity,
Oris I or Lakes Environmental, as well as attendance at R/L/S
Modelling Workshops, modeling conferences such as the I ifeirence
on Air Quality Modeling or the AWMA Air Modeling Conferences Other
training opportunities include courses provided by CenSARA
Y X N I 10. Do you follow The Air Quality Analysis, Additional Impacts Analysis,
and Class I Area Impact Analysis guidance provided in the New Source
Review Workshop Manual (Draft October 1990)?
11. For cumulative national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and
PSD increment compliance assessment:
a. How are the appropriate emission inventories of other sources
developed?
Response: Generally, the modeling inventory procedures include;
ng NDEE's Interactive Mapping App on our website to identify the
facilities with Clean Air Construction permits that are within 50~km of the
facility,,
:ermine the distance from the facility to the nearby and delete
everything greater than 50-" the list, then delete minor sources
greater than 30~km on the list.
Identify on a facility basis the average of the most recent 2-years of
total actual emission lission Inventory,
i ! 11 liillizing the "Screening Threshold" Method for PSD Modeling h> ¦in
North Carolina Air Quality Section to determine which nearby facilities
should be included in the model.
NAAQS nearbys ?QD
II -I« ii nearbys: > 3D
3mce the facilities that need to be included are identified, go through
CP Applications, OP Applications, and old modeling projects to determine
til deling parameters
Please not that Nebirasl sions Inventory does contain
modeling parameters, but they're rmat that can't be easily retrieved.
partment is currently working on solutions to streamline obtaining
modeling parameter information from applications and existing inventory
systems.
b. What are the reasons used to identify and/or eliminate emission
sources?
Response: Please refer to steps 1 through 5 above
c. How are PSD increment consuming/expanding sources
identified and tracked?
40
-------
Response: In the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracked. NDEE does conduct modeling for NSR major projects
and/or NSR major modification projects and takes into consideration
consuming/expanding sources. NDEE recently hired an additional modeler
into the Section and is working on a plan to formalized increment
consumption/expansion inventory for the State.
12. What is the basis (e.g., allowable, maximum or average actual short-
term emissions, last two year period, etc.) of the emission rates provided
in the NAAQS and PSD increment consuming inventories of other
sources?
Response: NDEE calculates a two-year average, actual emissions, in tons/year, from
the most recent two years in Emission Inventory. Care is taken to ensure
these values are representative of normal operating conditions by
comparing three, four, or even five years of Emission Inventory values.
For short-term averaging periods, the emission rate is generally divided by
8760 hours.
13. How do you ensure that the controlling concentrations reported by the
applicant for each pollutant and averaging period were appropriately
determined?
Response: NDEE evaluates calculations received along with the sources of
information utilized to conduct calculations. NDEE reviews operating
design parameters on emission units, basis for emission factors used, etc.
Y X N ~ 14. Are the impact modeling analyses reviewed to ensure that they are
accurate and complete, and that appropriate modeling procedures {e.g.,
modeled to 100-m resolution, fence line and not property line, nearest
modeled receptors, etc.) were followed?
Response: All modeling demonstrations use to show compliance with the NAAQS and
PSD Increments are thoroughly reviewed for accuracy and completeness.
AERMOD regulatory options, BPIP-Prime processing, receptor placement,
met data as provided by the Department, average actual emission rates
from nearby facilities as provided by the Department, allowable emission
rates in the Federally enforceable construction permit are all checked for
the final modeling run and a report containing the Department's predicted
modeled impact is supplied to the Permit Writers for inclusion in the Fact
Sheet.
YD NX 15. Is complex terrain an issue in your region?
If yes, what modeling procedures are used to address impacts in complex
terrain?
41
-------
Y X N ~ 16. Are pollutants without NAAQS and/or PSD increments addressed in
the air quality impact assessments?
If yes, what threshold concentrations {e.g., acceptable ambient
concentrations) are used to evaluate impacts?
Response: partment models CO if the net emission increase is greater than
in "<" tons/year, Rib if the net emission increase is greater than <" ^
tons/year, and Total IReduc llfuir (including H2S) if the net increase in
emission is greater than is/year,
Y X N ~ 17. Do you have written agency-specific air quality modeling guidance for
use by applicants?
Y X N ~ If yes, has the guidance been provided to other concerned organizations
{e.g., regional EPA, appropriate FLM, etc.) for review and comment?
Response: cument was last revised in 2017 (located at:
http://dee.ne.gov/publica.nsf/PubsForm.xsp?documentld=84D0237BF482
3862581940067B0CA&action=openDocument ), IN D IE IE is currently
working on updating the guidance documer document was reviewed
by II II - II ' ; -ion Villi in 201 >>i id once draft is completed for 2022, it will
undergo I giom Villi review.
Y X N ~ If yes, is your guidance available on the internet?
18. How do you determine the appropriateness of proposed
meteorological data for an application?
Response: partment provides 5-years of meteorological data for NSIR permit
modelling. It is the policy of the Department to be the sole provider of
these datasets to ensure consistency of the met data us» n project to
project. The data is processed and made available on request. In general,
there are only about five to six ASOS met stations out of a possible ten
stations that are used in air dispersion modelling, since most facilities that
emit air pollutants in Nebraska are located in tlf tern half of the State.
a. When are "on-site" meteorological data required for an
application?
Response: In practice, on-site data is never required.
Y ~ N X b. Are "on-site" meteorological data validated and accepted if
recovery is less than 90 percent?
42
-------
19. When an applicant's air quality modeling reveals NAAQS and/or PSD
increment violations, what is required to grant the permit and how are the
violations resolved?
Response: A culpability analysis is required to demonstrate that the facility is not
contributing to the violation at a level equal to or greater than 'It
ling that analysis, the facility can add additional control technology or
possibly increase the stack height
Y X N ~ 20. Do your regulations include the federal definition of ambient air?
If no, what is your definition of ambient air?
Response: As prescribed in Title 129 Chapter 1, Section ieint air" means
the portion of the atmosphere, external building, to which the general
public has access.
21. Discuss your procedures for modeling "hot spots," including minimum
receptor spacing?
Response: We require modelling "hot Spots" but only by inference in the August 2021
Modelling Protocol template, and without an explicit minimum spacing
requirement:
"In all cases, it is the applicant's responsibility to ensure the spatial
coverage of the receptor grid is adequate enough to determine the
worst case predicted ground level concentrations."
II ill «ll II is currently working on updating til i- in-'deling guidance and plans
to at" " ore explicit statement for this matter.
22. How do you determine if background air quality data are
representative?
Response: I takes steps in ensuring that background air quality data is
representative such as:
ilewing information to avoid the possibility of double counting
nearby impacts at the monitor while explicitly including nearby source in
til dell that is a similar source type and has approximately the same
proximity to the facility;
isidering the pollutant's residence time;
hatching the land use, terrain, and population as much as possible.
Y X N ~ 23. Do you use the same NAD for stack, receptor, and building UTM
coordinates?
Response: II ill "III uses III II« >i id WGS84 interchangeably. Some older models in
II ill «ll II " II irds, models from 201 >iij earlier, have mixed III -II« ' .>hel
NAD 83 coordinates.
43
-------
2. Class I Areas
Response: Please note that Nebraska does not contain any Class I areas The
closest Clla II .ineas outside of Nebraska aire til i- II midlands and Wind
Cave, approximately 54-km and 55~km respectively, due north from the
Nebraska/South Dakota State border Therefore, this section is currently
not applicable for projects in Nebraska
1. How do you determine which proposed projects need a Class I impacts
analysis, including consideration of distance of the source from Class I
areas {e.g., maximum distance criteria)?
Y ~ N ~ 2. For new or modified sources within 10 kilometers of Class I areas, do
you require sources to submit an impact analysis for all pollutants to
determine if any have impacts greater than 1 ug/mA3?
Y ~ N ~ 3. Do you require applicants to submit a Class I increment analysis for
each pollutant subject to PSD review for which an increment exists?
Y ~ N ~ 4. Do you require applicants to identify and provide a cumulative impacts
analysis (maximum impact within Class I areas) for all Class I areas
impacted by the source?
Y ~ N ~ 5. Do you have a formal procedure for notifying Federal Land Managers
(FLMs)?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N ~ 6. Do your permitting procedures require the applicants to notify Federal
Land Managers?
If yes, please explain.
Y ~ N ~ 7. Is there communication, consultation, and discussion between you and
FLMs?
If yes, to what extent {e.g., high, moderate, minimal).
Y ~ N ~ 8. Is there communication, consultation, and discussion between the
applicant and FLMs?
If yes, to what extent {e.g., high, moderate, minimal)?
Y ~ N ~ 9. Do you actively seek input from FLMs during the permitting process?
44
-------
Y ~ N ~ 10. Is the applicant required to address potential adverse impacts on air
quality related values (AQRVs) that are identified by the FLM during the
notification process?
Y ~ N ~ 11. Do you require prior approval of Class I area impact analysis
procedures that applicants plan to use?
Y ~ N ~ 12. Do you require applicants to perform a visibility analysis for Class I
areas?
Y ~ N ~ 13. If visibility impairment is indicated, do you require the applicant to
notify the appropriate FLM for the Class I area?
Y ~ N ~ 14. Is the applicant required to address potential effects on scenic vistas
associated with Class I areas that may have been identified by the FLM
during the notification process?
YDND 15. Do you have a formal process for handling Class I area increment
violations if predicted?
YDND 16. Have you issued PSD permits where the FLM objected?
If yes, please explain and identify the projects.
B. Nonattainment Major NSR Modeling
Response: Not applicable, the nonattainment NSR program does not currently apply
to Nebraska.
YDND 1. Do you require modeling to ensure that emission offsets provide a
positive net air quality benefit? (Only applies to sulfur dioxide, particulate
matter, and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas.)
C. Minor Source Modeling
Y ~ N X 1. Are minor permit actions {i.e., proposed new and modified minor
sources), evaluated to determine if modeling for PSD increments is
needed?
a. Under what circumstances is increment modeling triggered for
these minor permit actions?
Response: Only major NSR sources/major I jdification projects are required to
do PSD increment modelling.
45
-------
Y X N ~ 2. Do you use modeling to assure that minor sources and minor
modifications will not violate the NAAQS?
If so, at what emission thresholds?
Response: NDEE utilizes the Significant Emission Rate (SERs) for minor sources and
minor modifications.
Y ~ N X 3. Based on any modeling results, do you require installation of air quality
monitors or establish other permit conditions to assure protection of the
NAAQS and increment?
Y ~ N X 4. For the pollutants with PSD increments established do you have a list
of areas where the minor source baseline has been triggered?
Response: NDEE recently hired an additional modeler into the Section and is
working on a plan to formalized increment consumption/expansion
inventory for the State which will include baseline trigger dates.
Y X N ~ 5. Do you model minor sources for PSD increments if the minor source
baseline is triggered?
YD NX 6. Do you have procedures in place to identify minor sources that
consume or expand PSD increment?
D. Increment Tracking
1. What method do you use to assign baseline dates {e.g., county-
specific, region-specific, or entire state)?
Response: Major Source Baseline Date (MjSBD) is set by the EPA.
Trigger Date (TD) is set by the EPA.
Minor Source Baseline Date (MiSBD) is the date the first technically
complete, PSD Application is received after the TD. As long as the
application is technically complete, even if the application is later
withdrawn by the applicant, it will still trigger the MiSBD.
Y ~ N X 2. Do you have a list of the minor source baseline dates for each area?
If yes, please provide a copy.
Response: NDEE recently hired an additional modeler into the Section and is
working on a plan to formalized increment consumption/expansion
inventory for the State which will include baseline trigger dates.
Y ~ N X 3. Do you have an understanding of receptor location dependence vs.
source location dependence for increment tracking?
Response: NDEE recently hired an additional modeler into the Section and is
working on a plan to formalized increment consumption/expansion
inventory for the State which will include baseline trigger dates.
46
-------
YD N X
Response:
YD N X
Response:
Response:
Response:
YD N X
Response:
4. Do you have a program for tracking increment consumption?
If yes, please describe the program and whether it is a formal or an
informal program?
In the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracked. NDEE does conduct modeling for NSR major projects
and/or NSR major modification projects and takes into consideration
consuming/expanding sources. NDEE recently hired an additional modeler
into the Section and is working on a plan to formalized increment
consumption/expansion inventory for the State.
5. Do you maintain and update a computerized emission source database
for increment tracking that includes minor sources that affect increment?
If yes, does the database include the information needed for modeling
{e.g., source locations, stack parameters, emissions)?
In the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracked. NDEE does conduct modeling for NSR major projects
and/or NSR major modification projects and takes into consideration
consuming/expanding sources. NDEE recently hired an additional modeler
into the Section and is working on a plan to formalized.
6. Do you use allowable or actual emissions for increment tracking
purposes?
In the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracked. NDEE does conduct modeling for NSR major projects
and/or NSR major modification projects and takes into consideration
consuming/expanding sources. NDEE recently hired an additional modeler
into the Section and is working on a plan to formalized.
a. If actual emissions, how do you calculate emissions for each
averaging period covered by the increments?
Average actual, using the most recent two-years that are representative of
normal operating conditions. Please refer to answer to question on Section
V.A.H.a
7. Are area sources included in increment tracking analyses {e.g., growth-
related and transportation-related emissions)?
8. How frequently is increment consumption evaluated - on a scheduled
basis or just when occasioned by a new permit application?
Currently, increment consumption is evaluated when a new permit
application is received, NDEE has recently hired another modeler into the
47
-------
Section and I id is working on a plan to formalize the tracking which
will include increment consumption scheduled evaluations,
9. How "transparent" {i.e., understandable) is the emission source
inventory used for PSD modeling? {i.e., could an outside reviewer (such
as a member of the public) clearly identify the sources included {e.g.,
name, location, stack parameters) and the sources excluded in a modeling
analysis?)
Response: In the recent past, PSD increment consuming/expanding was not being
formally tracke< does conduct modelling for NSIR major projects
and/or NSIR major modification projects and takes into consideration
consuming/expanding sources, IN ID IE IE recently hired an additional modeller
into the Section and is working on a plan to formalized,
10. How do you handle interstate increment tracking (for state reviewing authorities) or
inter-jurisdiction tracking (for local reviewing authorities), including
consistency of tracking across jurisdiction boundaries?
This would be evaluated on case-by-case basis dependent on the project,
11. What procedure do you follow in planning for and incorporating new
modeling tools?
oes not follow a formal procedure in planning for and incorporating
new modelling tools. Staff attends regular tiraimiir inferences, and
communicates with I giom Villi on a regular basis to understand if
there are new modeling tools available.
12. Do you provide increment tracking training to NSR permitting staff
(other than on-the-job training)?
If yes, describe the nature of the training provided.
13. Are mobile sources modeled for increment compliance?
14. How does the public access a list of sources that affect PSD
increments?
modeling tools?
All permitting applications, documentation related to draft of permits, and
any other applicable documentation is available to the public via the
Nebrask terprise Content Management Portal.
Response:
Response:
Y N X
Y N X
Response:
48
-------
VI. Other Program Elements
A. Environmental Justice (EJ)
Note: By EJ analysis we refer to any procedures applied during the
permitting process, regardless of whether they are called EJ, that consider
demographics (race, income, nationality, etc.), cumulative effects,
(burden, exposure, risk), comparative effects or modifications to the public
involvement processes to address unique characteristics of the project.
Y ~ N X 1. Do you consider EJ issues during the permitting process? If yes,
please provide a description of the criteria, guidelines, or screening
procedures used to address EJ issues
Response: NDEE does not have legislation or a formal policy or guidance expressly
addressing environmental justice. However, NDEE, in the administration
of its programs and activities, seeks to ensure fair treatment of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and meaningful
involvement of the public with respect to our environmental programs.
NDEE has placed a non-discrimination statement prominently on its
webpage and designated a deputy director as the point of contact for any
questions. Other examples include (1) extensive stakeholder outreach in
the regulation development process, (2) public information sessions
associated with draft permits in addition to public hearings, (3) a robust
citizen complaint system and an online "report a problem", (4) compliance
assistance on NESHAPs and NSPS, (5) an enforcement goal to protect
and reduce risk to human health and the environment, (6) grant
programs, and (7) the ability to utilize limited language translation
services.
Y ~ N X 2. Regarding section 173(a)(5) of the Clean Air Act, do you conduct an
alternatives analysis as part of your nonattainment area permitting
process? If yes, please provide a description of the EJ criteria or
guidelines used for this analysis
Response: N/A; Nebraska currently does not have any nonattainment areas.
49
-------
Y X N ~ 3. Regarding section 165(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act, does your NSR
permitting program and public comment process for PSD regulated
pollutants provide for consideration of alternatives?
4. How are the demographics of the affected community taken into
account in the permitting process?
Response: Demographics aire not taken into account during the permitting process.
Please refer to answer to Section VI A 1
5. How are cumulative effects and/or pre-existing burden addressed in
the permitting process?
Response: Air Dispersion Modelling is conducted (if necessary) in accordance with
federal regulations and NIDEE's modelling guidance,
6. What additional community information and/or demographics (for
example - children, the elderly) do you consider important for an EJ
analysis?
Response: Please refer to answer to Section VI.A. 1,
Y ~ N ~ 7. Do you allow public involvement during an EJ analysis? If yes,
a. What stakeholder groups do you try to involve?
b. At what point in the EJ analysis or permitting process do
stakeholders become involved?
c. To what degree and in what manner do stakeholders or the
community influence the permit decision making process?
d. To what degree do you know about how stakeholders or the
affected community participated in the permit decision making
process?
e. Describe how you make information available to stakeholders
and the affected community. (For example - translation of
information, understandable and accessible materials, personal
contacts, clearly explained technical information including potential
risk, distribution of information, public meetings, etc.)
Response: Not Applicable, Please refer to answer to Section VI.A. 1,
50
-------
Y ~ N ~ 8. In the EJ analysis, do you consider direct and indirect benefits and
burdens from the proposed actions? If yes,
a. Describe what benefits you consider in the EJ analysis. (For
example - economic, social, cultural, health, environmental, etc.)
b. Describe what burdens you consider in the EJ analysis. (For
example - economic, social, cultural, health, environmental, etc.)
Response: Not Applicable,, Please refer to answer to Section VI A 1
Y ~ N ~ 9. In the EJ analysis, do you consider comparative and disproportionate
impacts? If yes,
a. Describe the criteria or procedures used to determine any
potential or actual adverse health or environmental effects or
impacts.
b. Describe the criteria or procedures used to determine whether
evidence exists to describe these effects or impacts.
c. Describe the criteria or procedures used to determine whether
the proposed project complies with all applicable environmental
laws.
Response: Not Applicable,, Please refer to answer to Section VI A 1
B. Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Y ~ N X 1. If you have a delegated PSD program, do you notify PSD permit
applicants of their ESA obligations?
If so, please provide a copy or description of your notice.
Y ~ N X 2. If you have a delegated PSD program, do you advise applicants,
concerning their ESA obligations, to consult with a.) EPA; b.) The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; and/or c.) Federal Land Manager?
If yes, please explain, and describe what information you provide to
applicants concerning their ESA obligations.
Response; Although I does not explicitly advise applicants concerning their ESA
obligations, the permits contain the following language:
"Holding of this permit does not relieve the source from the responsibility
to comply with all applicable portions of the Nebraska Air Quality
Regulations and any other requirements under local, State, or Federal
law. Any permit noncompliance shall constitute a violation of the
Nebraska Environmental Protection Act and the Federal Clean Air Act,
51
-------
and is grounds for enforcement action or permit revocatic lie 129,
Chapter ! I ,>i id Chapter 17, Section o\ l»"
Y ~ N X 3. If you have a SIP approved PSD program, do you have any
responsibilities under your state law to carry out an endangered species
analysis?
If so, please briefly describe the scope of the program. If no, please so
indicate.
Response: I suits with local governments, federal and land managers before
the issuance of . through the application review and public
participation process, which provides opportunity for interested parties to
comment on the project,,
Y ~ N ~ 4. If you carry out a federal or state ESA review, does the consultation
affect the timing of your issuance of a proposed or final permit?
If yes, please explain.
Response: Not Applicable,,
C. State & Local Agency Coordination
1. How do the local and state agencies coordinate permitting-related
responsibilities?
Response: Lincoln Lancaster County and the City of Omaha issue NSIR permits
iin.'lor and minor source » II ill "III i- viev III ! | -ermits and have regular
nication with the local agencies,, IN ID IE IE collaborates with local
agencies on questions in regard to facilities, IN ID IE IE aids deling for
the local agencies, has opportunity to comment on public notice on
permits being drafts and share training opportunities as they become
available,.
2. How does the department overview the local agency's permitting
activities?
Response: III i- re is no formalized auditing program thai II ill «ll II conducts for the local
agencies,, Lincoln Lancaster County and the City of Omaha issue NSIR
permits (major and minor sources),, I ews NSIR permits and have
regular communication with the local agencies,, IN ID IE IE collaborates with
local agencies on questions in regard to facilities, IN ID IE IE aids on modelling
for the local agencies, has opportunity to comment on public notice on
permits being drafts and share training opportunities as they become
available,,
Y X N ~ 3. Does the local agency routinely send draft and final permits to the state
agency for review, comment, and concurrence?
52
-------
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
If yes, please explain the details.
II ill «ll II I- - news III -I ||» rmits and have regular communication with the
local agencies, IN ID IE IE collaborates with local agencies on questions
regarding facilities, I lids on modelling for the local agencies, has
opportunity to comment on public notice on permits being drafts and share
training opportunities as they become available,.
4. How often does the local agency provide the state with information on
its permitting activities?
At least monthly,,
5. Do you interact with other state environmental media programs (e.g.
water, RCRA, waste) when permitting complicated projects?
Yes, Air Construction Permitting often interacts with other state
environmental media program depending on the projects,. The current
organizational changes also facilitate dialogue between til zliia since
permitting for all media is under one division,,
6. Please provide a copy of the most recent program review you have
completed for each local agency with all or a portion of the NSR permitting
responsibilities in the state.
There is no formalized auditing program that IN ID IE IE conducts for the local
agencies,, Lincoln Lancaster County and the City of Omaha issue NSR
permits (major and minor sources),, I reviews NSR permits and have
regular communication with the local agencies,, IN ID IE IE collaborates with
local agencies on questions regarding facilities, I ds on modelling
for the local agencies, has opportunity to comment on public notice on
permits being drafts and share training opportunities as they become
available,.
53
-------
NEBRASKA
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENES6Y
-------
ATTACHMENT C: Completed Title V Questionnaire
Returned by NDEE prior to Audit.
[ see the attached copy ]
75
-------
Title V Program
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
NDEE - 2022
Last Updated: December 7, 2006
-------
Instructions for completing the
Title V Permit Program
Self-Evaluation Questionnaire
When answering Yes or No questions, please add explanation as
appropriate to clarify your response.
Please skip any sections of the self-evaluation questionnaire that do not
apply within your permitting jurisdiction rather than answering
hypothetically.
If you have a written policy or guidance document that substantially
answers any question in this self-evaluation questionnaire, please so
indicate and either attach a hardcopy to your response or point to a
specific URL on your public web server where the document may be
found.
This self-evaluation questionnaire was developed by EPA Headquarters
and Regions to assist in the agency's Title V oversight program. As part
of its peer review process, EPA sought review and comment from
STAPPA-ALAPCO. While this questionnaire has undergone a make-
over from the original, the scope and detail of the questions asked
remains the same for all agencies.
2
-------
Table of Contents
A. Title V Permit Preparation and Content
B. General Permits (GP)
C. Monitoring
D. Public Participation and Affected State Review
E. Permit Issuance / Revision / Renewal
F. Compliance
G. Resources & Internal Management Support
H. Title V Benefits
3
-------
A. Title V Permit Preparation and Content
1. What % of your initial applications contained sufficient information so
the permit could be drafted without seeking additional information? What
efforts were taken to improve quality of applications if this % was low?
Response: re is always additional questions or information needed during the
drafting of the initial operating permits,. During the drafting of the permit
documents, II ill «ll II ¦ inn nicates regularly with the source to help
determine the applicability State and Federal regulations and to help
determine the appropriate monitoring and recordkeeping requirements,.
However, during the renewal process, I usually has very few
questions and usually very little additional information has been needed,,
is constantly improving our renewal forms to assist the source to
submit a complete application while streamlining the process by allowing
sources to use their active operating permit (OP) as the basis of their
application,. The source only provides detail in the application about any
changes made to the facility since the issuance of their active permit,. This
process not only streamlines the renewal application process for the
facility, but it also streamlines the drafting process for I ; we can
focus on the changes made during this permit cycle,,
current renewal process allows the source to complete their
application in i shorter time and produces a moire complete
application,. This process also ireduo time to review the
application for completeness as well as reducing the drafting time of the
permit documents,. As stated above, IN ID IE IE also communicates regularly
with the source during the drafting of the permit documents to
c inicate any changes in regulations or requirements that have taken
place since the issuance of their active permit,,
2. For those title V sources with an application on file, do you require the
sources to update their applications in a timely fashion if a significant
amount of time has passed between application submittal and the time
you draft the permit?
Response: re is no requirement in Title 129 that states a source must update their
application once it is submitted,. However, if a significant amount of time
has passed since the receipt of the application, the permit writer will
contact the source and ask it there has been changes to the facility since
the submission of the application and if there has, then will request an
updated application,,
a. Do you require a new compliance certification?
Response: I only requires an updated compliance certification if there are
significant changes to the original application,.
4
-------
3. Do you verify that the source is in compliance before a permit is issued
and if so, how?
Response: Sources are required to submit Certification of Compliance Reports every
year, these reports as well as Compliance Inspection Reports and all other
information that is in the facility file since the issuance of their active
permit is reviewed by the assigned permit writer. The permit writer will
also communicate with the Compliance Team during the permit drafting
process to determine if there are any outstanding compliance issues have
been identified.
The permit writer will also review the Construction Permit (CP) Team's
permit application log to determine if the source has any active
construction permit applications. If there are active construction permit
applications, then the permit writer will discuss with the CP Team the
deails of the application and how it will affect the drafing of the OP.
a. In cases where the facility is out of compliance, are specific
milestones and dates for returning to compliance included in the
permit, or do you delay issuance until compliance is attained?
Response: NDEE usually does not delay permit issuance due to a compliance
problem. If the source is out of compliance at the time of permit issuance,
the permit will contain a compliance schedule which will have specific
milestones and dates the source must meet to be able to return to
compliance.
4. What have you done over the years to improve your permit writing and
processing time?
Response: NDEE staff participate in available CenSARA training and use customized
and standard permit formats as well as standardized permit conditions
whenever possible. Permitting staff also meet on a routine basis to give
presentations on specific subjects that will help improve permitting
practices as well as discuss permitting challenges. NDEE is completed
process improvement activities to help improve our applications,
factsheets and permits. These processes have resulted in streamlining
our work to be able to complete and issue permits quicker and has
improved our final product. The table below illustrates the progress made
by the operating permit team in reducing backlog since 2016.
5
-------
Air Quality Operating Permit Applications
5. Do you have a process for quality assuring your permits before
issuance? Please explain.
All permits are reviewed by the following process:
1. Peer reviewed by another permit writer
2. Reviewed by compliance team
3. Reviewed by the source prior to public notice
4. Reviewed by section supervisor before public notice
5. Public notice period
6. Reviewed by Division Administrator before issuance
6. Do you utilize any streamlining strategies in preparing the permit such
as:
a. Incorporating test methods, major and minor New Source
Review permits, MACT's, other Federal requirements into the Title
V permit by referencing the permit number, FR citation, or rule?
Response: Federal Rules are incorporated into our permits by referencing the
applicable rule. NDEE also includes all limits required by the federal rule
for each affected emissions point in the permitted emissions limit table.
Response:
6
-------
b. Streamlining multiple applicable requirements on the same
emission unit(s) (i.e., grouping similar units, listing the requirements
of the most stringent applicable requirements)? Describe.
Response: Each permit I ssues is unique to each permitted source. NIDIEIE's
current practice is to permit by process rather than by emissions units.
So, all the applicable federal and state requirements, permitted limits,
testing requirements, operational requirements, monitoring requirements,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for the emissions units and
control devices for a single process are listed together. I :lhi additional
process for the source is handled in the sain iner. Some examples of
processes are grain handling, milling, fermentation, boilers, thermal
oxidizer/heat recovery steam generator system, storage tanks, cooling
towers, haul roads, etc.
c. Describe any other streamlining efforts.
Response II ill «l II implement I I -l guidance for streamlining operating permits, we
also utilize the insignificant activities process allowed by EPA NDEE has
streamlined the application process by allowing sources to use their active
operating permit as the basis of their application and then only provide
detail in the application about any changes made to the facility since the
issuance of their active permit. This process not only streamlines the
renewal application process for the facility, but it also streamlines the
drafting process for NDEE as we can focus on the changes made during
this permit eye Iso requires the facility to identify all
construction permits issued, operating permit revisions made and any
non-permitted changes to the facility and an updal nd actual
emissions summary for the facility. also allows the facility to
provide proposed language for the for the permit in their application. The
current renewal application template can be found in Attachment A
7. What do you believe are the strengths and weaknesses of the format of
the permits (i.e. length, readability, facilitates compliance certifications,
etc.)? Why?
Response mat of our permits is periodically updated as regulations change
and feedback is provided by sources. jves our current format
provides the regulated community a succinct as possible permit that
includes all the necessary detail that the source needs to understand and
comply with the applicable permit requirements.
8. How do you fulfill the requirement for a statement of basis? Please
provide examples.
Response I provides a fact sheet (statement of basis) for each permit issued.
t sheet is prepared specifically for each source and contains
source description, permitting history, list of permitted emissions points
with descriptions, type and quantity of emissions produced, applicability of
7
-------
federal rules (why or why mt cussion of specific permit conditions,
when needed, which can include the following:
1. explanation of permit limits
2. explanation of operational ai " nitoring requirements
3. recordkeeping and reporting requirements
The fact sheet will also include a list of conditions that were included in the
facilities construction permits that are not included in the operating permit
with an explanation of why they weren't included,
9. Does the statement of basis1 explain:
a. the rationale for monitoring (whether based on the underlying
standard or monitoring added in the permit)?
b. applicability and exemptions, if any?
c. streamlining (if applicable)?
II ill «ll II has complete''¦ .> | -i ocess improvement exercise in 2020
which reviewed the content of our fact sheets and based on the
results of this exercise changes were made to reduce the content of
the fact sheet to only include the necessary information,
also changed the process to list insignificant activities in the fact
sheet only and jnot in the OP
10. Do you provide training and/or guidance to your permit writers on the
content of the statement of basis?
Response:
11. Do any of the following affect your ability to issue timely initial title V
permits:
a. SIP backlog (i.e., EPA approval still awaited for proposed SIP
revisions)
Response: No
Response:
Response:
Response:
1 The Statement of Basis sets forth the legal and factual basis for the permit as
required by 70.7(a)(5). The permitting authority might use another name for this
document such as Technical Support Document, Determination of Compliance, Fact
Sheet.
8
-------
b. Pending revisions to underlying NSR permits
Response: No
c. Compliance/enforcement issues
Response: No
Response: No
Response: No
d. EPA rule promulgation awaited (MACT, NSPS, etc.)
e. Issues with EPA on interpretation of underlying applicable
requirements
f. Permit renewals and permit modification (i.e., competing
priorities)
Response: Occasionally
g. Awaiting EPA guidance
Response: No
i. If yes, what type of guidance?
Response: Not applicable
ii. If yes, have you communicated this to EPA?
Response: Not applicable
A. If yes, how did you request the guidance?
If yes, please specify what type of EPA
guidance, and how you requested the
guidance
Note: If yes to any of the above, please explain.
12. Any additional comments on permit preparation or content?
Response: I ently has 4 applications that aire over 18 months old and two of
those aire actively being worked on by the assigned permit writer and
expect to be issued by the end of 2022. Currently, all operating permit
renewal applications submissions are assigned to a permit writer within 30
days of receipt with the goal of issuance within 60 days of permit
expiration. Also, currently all initial operating permit applications received
are assigm . irmit writer within 30 days of receipt with the goal of
issuance within i"! months but no more than 1 v in-Tiths of receipt.
9
-------
B. General Permits (GP)
1. Do you issue general permits?
Response: II ill «l II does not issue general title V permits,, II ill "III does issue one Class
III iineirall operating permit for incinerators,,
a. If no, go to next section
b. If yes, list the source categories and/or emission units covered
by general permits.
Response: Small animal incinerators and small bake-off incinerators that are not
subject to a federal rule,, I urrently has 38 facilities who have
applied and received coverage under the general operating permit,.
Response:
2. In your agency, can a title V source be subject to multiple general
permits and/or a general permit and a standard "site-specific" Title V
permit?
does not issue general title V permits,.
a. What percentage of your title V sources have one or more
general permits? %
Response:
3. Do the general permits receive public notice in accordance with
70.7(h)?
a. How does the public or regulated community know what general
permits have been written? (E.g., are the general permits posted on
a website, available upon request, published somewhere?)
Response: 111> ¦ ¦¦ neral operating permit is posted on I U >1 II 3bsite and facilities
are required to request coverage under the permit by filling out an online
request that is also posted on the website,,
4. Is the 5-year permit expiration date based:
Response:
a. on the date the general permit is issued?
Response: . the general operating permit expires 5-years after issuance,.
b. on the date you issue the authorization for the source to operate
under the general permit?
Response: cillity may apply for coverage any time during the duration of the
general permit; however, the coverage is only from the time of approval of
their request to the expiration of the active general operating permit,.
10
-------
5. Any additional comments on general permits?
Response: No
C. Monitoring
1. How do you ensure that your operating permits contain adequate
monitoring (i.e., the monitoring required in §§ 70.6(a)(3) and 70.6(c)(1)) if
monitoring is not specified in the underlying standard or CAM?
Response: I , team reviews previous compliance inspection reports,
certification of compliance reports, deviation reports as well as historic and
current emissions testing reports. Based on the review of the reports and
using engineering and professional judgment, the permit team determine
the frequency of monitoring that is needed to demonstrate continuous
compliance with the permitted limit.
a. Have you developed criteria or guidance regarding how
monitoring is selected for permits? If yes, please provide the
guidance.
Response: No, however we strive for consistency amongst similar source categories
to assure sufficient monitoring is in place to demonstrate compliance. As
we learn moire about a source , articular category, we apply those
lessons learned to other sources in that same category.
2. Do you provide training to your permit writers on monitoring? (e.g.,
periodic and/or sufficiency monitoring; CAM; monitoring QA/QC
procedures including for CEMS; test methods; establishing parameter
ranges)
Response: I , writers attend available CenSARA classes that include
monitoring and QA/QC procedures and CenSARA also has a class for
CAM. New permit writers £ ntoired by moire experienced permit
writers which helps them to determine appropriate monitoring. Also as
part of the permit drafting process, the permit writer will review the
previously issued permit as well as active permits of similar sources to
help them determine appropris litoring that will demonstrate
continuous compliance with the permit requirements. Permit writers
collaborate with the CP team and Compliance team in Air Program team
events as well as one on one to help understand how the different teams
evaluate and handle challenges with permitting and compliance.
3. How often do you "add" monitoring not required by underlying
requirements? Have you seen any effects of the monitoring in your
permits such as better source compliance?
Response Nebraska generally does not impose requirements that are more stringent
than the requirements in federal rules. Generally, NIDIEIE's testing, and
monitoring requirements are based on federal and state requirements.
11
-------
However, there are times that additional testing and monitoring is required
due to individual facility conditions and/or conditions within the air shed
that would ireqi i increase in testing and monitoring.
4. Are you incorporating CAM monitoring into your permits?
Response: , IN ID IE IE also includes the completed CAM Plan as an attachment to
the permit.
D. Public Participation and Affected State Review
Public Notification Process
1. Do you publish notices on proposed title V permits in a newspaper of
general circulation?
Response: . IN ID IE IE publishes notices in the newspaper closest to the facility so
the public living in and near the source are aware of the proposed
permitting action.
All of our permitting actions requiring notice are also published on our
website.
2. Do you use a state publication designed to give general public notice?
Response: Omaha World Herald, which is the official state of Nebraska newspaper
3. On average, how much does it cost to publish a public notice in the
newspaper (or state publication)?
Response: cost for publishing a public notice varies from approximately $50 to
approximately $800,
4. Have you published a notice for one permit in more than one paper?
Response: No
a. If so, how many times have you used multiple notices for a
permit?
b. How do you determine which publications to use?
c. What cost-effective approaches have you utilized for public
publication?
5. Have you developed a mailing list of people you think might be
interested in title V permits you propose? [e.g., public officials, concerned
environmentalists, citizens]
Response: II ill «ll II does not have .> mailing list for titl- \ n^rmits,
12
-------
a. How does a person get on the list?
b. How does the list get updated?
c. How long is the list maintained for a particular source?
d. What do you send to those on the mailing list?
6. Aside from publications described above, do you use other means of
public notification?
Respoir . all public notices aire posted on IN ID EE's website
If yes, what are they (e.g., post notices on your webpage, e-mail)?
Response: website address is http://dee.ne.gov/Press.nsf/PNall.xsp
7. Do you reach out to specific communities (e.g., environmental justice
communities) beyond the standard public notification processes?
Response: Not generally, however, we aire always willing to meet oir ha' ill with
citizens who have questions oir concerns about a permitting action.
8. Do your public notices clearly state when the public comment period
begins and ends?
Response:
9. What is your opinion on the most effective avenues for public notice?
Response: I Website
a. Are the approaches you use for public notice effective?
Response:
10. Do you provide notices in languages besides English? Please list.
Response: No
Public Comments
11. Have you ever been asked by the public to extend a public comment
period?
Response:
a. If yes, did you normally grant them?
Response:
b. If not, what would be the reason(s)?
13
-------
12. Has the public ever suggested improvements to the contents of your
public notice, improvements to your public participation process, or other
ways to notify them of draft permits? Describe.
Response: No
13. Do you provide the public a copy of the statement of basis if they
request it? If no, explain.
Response: Yes, the fact sheet is provided as part of the public notice documents for
all permits. All of the materials supporting the NDEE's permitting action
are also available through our website.
14. What percentage of your permits have received public comments?
Response: NDEE receives public notice comments less than 5% of the time.
Response:
15. Over the years, has there been an increase in the number of public
comments you receive on title V permits? Is there any pattern to types of
sources getting comments?
No
16. Have you noticed any trends in the type of comments you have
received? Please explain.
Response: N/A Comments generally come from the source and pertain to unique
issues regarding their facility.
Response:
a. What percentage of your permits change due to public
comments?
Less than 1 % of permits will change due to public comment.
Response:
17. Have specific communities (e.g., environmental justice communities)
been active in commenting on permits?
No
18. Do your rules require that any change to the draft permit be re-
proposed for public comment?
Response: No
a. If not, what type of changes would require you to re-propose
(and re-notice) a permit for comment?
Response: A significant change such as a permitted limit relaxation or decrease in
monitoring would result in republic noticing the permit documents.
14
-------
EPA 45-day Review
19. Do you have an arrangement with the EPA region for its 45-day
review to start at the same time the 30-day public review starts? What
could cause the EPA 45-day review period to restart (i.e., if public
comments received, etc)?
Response: Yes, EPA's comment period starts at the beginning of the public comment
period. However, anytime during the public comment period EPA can
either submit comments or notify NDEE that they are invoking their 45-day
review period to begin after the public comment period and receiving the
complete permit record for review.
a. How does the public know if EPA's review is concurrent?
Response: NDEE's current public notice does not specifically state when EPA's
review period begins and ends. The format of NDEE's public notice is in
accordance with NDEE's approved Workplan, Section 2.12. The public
notice states the following:
Within 60 days after the US Environmental Protection Agency
Administrator review, persons may petition the Administrator to object to
the issuance of the proposed permit. Any such petition shall be based only
on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity
during the 30-day comment period, unless the petitioner demonstrates
that it was not practicable to raise such objection within such period. For
specific dates for which the 60-day petition period is open, contact {Permit
Writerjat (402) 471-2186. Petitions should be submitted electronically
through EPA's Central Data Exchange at https://cdx.epa.gov . If the
petitioner is unable to use the Central Data Exchange, EPA requests that
your submission be emailed to titleVpetitions@epa.gov . If petitioner is
unable to submit electronically, then a hard copy of the petition can be
submitted, please contact the permit writer above for EPA's address.
Response:
20. Is this concurrent review process memorialized in your rules, a MOA
or some other arrangement?
The review process is outlined in NDEE's approved Workplan in Section
2.7.
Permittee Comments
21. Do you work with the permittees prior to public notice?
Response: Yes, we are in communication with the source from start to finish during
the drafting of the permit documents process prior to public notice.
22. Do permittees provide comments/corrections on the permit during the
public comment period? Any trends in the type of comments? How do
15
-------
these types of comments or other permittee requests, such as changes to
underlying NSR permits, affect your ability to issue a timely permit?
Response: Occasionall III receive comment from sources which are usually
minor in nature, such as typographical error works extensively
with the source during drafting of the permit documents as well as provide
the draft permit to the source for review prior to public notice. It is NIDIEIE's
intent to have all potential challenges with the draft permit worked out and
agreed upon before the draft permit is submitted for public notice,
II ill «ll II has not noticed any trends in ill i- h | f comments received during
public notice.
Public Hearings
23. What triggers a public hearing on a title V permit?
Response: quest from the public or the source during the public comment period.
Response: No
a. Do you ever plan the public hearing yourself, in anticipation of
public interest?
Availability of Public Information
24. Do you charge the public for copies of permit-related documents?
Response: All public noticed draft permit documents are available electronically
through NIDIEIE's electronic records system and can be accessed at
http://dee.ne.gov/Press.nsf/PNall.xsp If paper copies are requested,
voulld charge for them.
If yes, what is the cost per page?
Response: instructions and costs for obtaining copies of records are found at
http://dee ne gov/' S. V » nsf/OnWeb/PRR
Response:
Response:
No
a. Are there exceptions to this cost (e.g., the draft permit requested
during the public comment period, or for non-profit organizations)?
b. Do your title V permit fees cover this cost? If not, why not?
No, IN ID IE IE has not received a request for a paper copy of the public
noticed permit documents since making them available electronically.
25. What is your process for the public to obtain permit-related
information (such as permit applications, draft permits, deviation reports,
6-month monitoring reports, compliance certifications, statement of basis)
especially during the public comment period?
16
-------
Response:
All public records for each permitted facility in Nebraska can be obtained
by accessing their electronic file by going to NIDIEIE's website
instructions are bellow:
Online Document Searches
How to View Document Images for ility
lity-related documents have been imaged into the State of
Nebraska's Enterpri ntent Management system (ECU) since April
M is the repository of official facility records that are created
or received by the agen cuments that have been scanned into the
II 1 'M are available to review fr- in ¦ i «ir Public Records Search
ise this option, you will need to know the facility number and program.
i'ii can call !<"' ! 1 ¦ >> or email ndee records@nebraska gov to
obta cility number for a records search. The search will return a
maximum of up to 500 of the most recent documents. The date fields are
optional for a records search, unless a message appears stating you need
to narrow your search to view additional documents, then dates will be
required to view older documents.
Response No
a. Are any of the documents available locally (e.g., public libraries,
field offices) during the public comment period? Explain.
26. How long does it take to respond to requests for information for
permits in the public comment period?
Response Requests for additional information by the public has not happened during
iblic notice period for at least five years All public information for each
permitted facility is available through NDEE s electronic content manager
Ml). Please see question 25 above for how to access ECM Also, all
public noticed draft permit documents are available electronically through
lectronic records system and can be accessed at
http://dee ne gov/Press nsf/PNall xsp .
27. Have you ever extended your public comment period as a result of
information requests?
Response No, a request to extend the public comment period would have to be
requested by the source or the public.
a. Where is this information stored?
Response All public information is stored in I 4 and is available electronically as
outlined in question 25 above
b. Do information requests, either during or outside of the public
comment period, affect your ability to issue timely permits?
Response No
17
-------
c. Have you ever extended the public comment period because of
a request for a public hearing?
Response , if til i- II ectoir approves the public hearing request, the public
c mt period is extended until the conclusion of the public hearing,
28. Do you have a website for the public to get permit-related
documents?
IRespoir . public notice documents are found at
http://dee.iie.gov/Press.iisf/PNall.xsp T
Hi' I.'- ilii'1 complete public file is available through II ill «ll II 1 II ¦ If 1,
Please see question 25 above for how to acce: A,
a. What is available online?
Response: All public information since April 2011 is available for each permitted
facility is through NIDIEIE's electronic file (ECM) Please see question 25
above for how to access ECM.
b. How often is the website updated? Is there information on how
the public can be involved?
Response: . 3lliic record is updated continuously, and the records received by
are usually available to the public after seven days of receipt.
Documents generated by tlf are made available on the ECM upon
mailing.
Response:
29. Have other ideas for improved public notification, process, and/or
access to information been considered? If yes, please describe.
No
Response:
30. Do you have a process for notifying the public as to when the 60-day
citizen petition period starts? If yes, please describe.
, the public notice includes information about the 60-day citizen period.
Response:
31. Do you have any resources available to the public on public
participation (booklets, pamphlets, webpages) ?
, the public notice contains contact information for the public to obtain
additional information.
Response:
32. Do you provide training to citizens on public participation or on title V?
No
33. Do you have staff dedicated to public participation, relations, or
liaison?
Response: s an Office of Public Information that serves as a liaison
between the public and the agency. This team is for the entire agency and
is not dedicated to just Title V. However all air permitting staff are
18
-------
Response:
Response
Response:
Response
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
available to the public to answer questions as well.
a. Where are they in the organization?
All the Air Program permit writers are in the Permitting & Engineering
Division, located at 'ice in Lincoln.
b. What is their primary function?
Reviewing applications and drafting permit documents for issuance.
Affected State Review and Review by Indian Tribes
34. How do you notify affected States of draft permits?
ends an email to all affected States with the facility information
and instructions on how to access ECM to obtain the public notice
documents.
a. How do you determine what States qualify as "affected States"
for your draft permits?
reviews each submitted permit application to determine if the facility
is within the 50 miles of an affected State.
35. How do you notify tribes of draft permits?
ends an email to all affected States with the facility information
and instructions on how to access ECM to obtain the public notice
documents.
36. What percentage of your permits get comments from affected States?
from Tribes?
has not received any comments from affected States or Tribes on
any permitting actions for over seven years.
37. Is there any pattern to the type of draft permit that gets affected State
/Tribal comment? Are there common themes in comments from affected
States or Tribes?
has not received any comments from affected States or Tribes on
any permitting actions for over seven years.
38. Suggestions to improve your notification process?
None at this time.
Any additional comments and public notification?
None at this time.
19
-------
E. Permit Issuance / Revision / Renewal
Initial Permit Issuance
1. If not all initial permits have been issued, do you have a plan to ensure
your permits are issued in a reasonable timeframe? If not, what can EPA
do to help?
Response: II ill «ll II has the following Initial permit applications that aire over 1 v m-nths
old:
Facility
#
Facility
Name
Date
Received
Location
of Facility
Date
Assigned
Current
Status
Issuance
Goal
57902
Cargill
Com
Milling
11/15/1996
Blair
Cargill -
4/2016
NDEE -
2/2019
(Cargill
requested
NDEE finish
permit)
Issued
Issued
5/12/2022
64401
Cargill
Polyols
12/18/2006
Blair
8/2020
Drafting
12/2022
91164
Cargill
Latic
Acid
5/4/2007
Blair
1/2020
Reviewing
Source
comment
prior to public
notice
8/2022
59052
Aurora
East
9/29/2008
Aurora
Not
Applicable
Facility
ceased
operation,
waiting for
facility to
submit letter
(this is
connected to
Aurora West
below)
Not
Applicable
87072
Aurora
West
6/27/2013
Aurora
Not
Applicable
All OP
activities are
on hold,
Source is
significantly
changing
facility and
submitting a
new CP.
Unknown
Currently all complete initial permit applications receiv
assigned within 30 days and completed and issued within onths of
receipt,
20
-------
Permit Revisions
Response:
2. Did you follow your regulations on how to process permit modifications
based on a list or description of what changes can qualify for:
a. Administrative amendment? (See § 70.7(d)(vi))
, see Title 129, Chapter 15, Section 001
b. §502(b)(10) changes? (See §70.4(b)(12))
Response: i ¦ , see Title 129, Chapter 1 > iMi u< in*' <11 ill' Iiirioir Revisions)
I- , see Title 129, Chapter l > mom 005 (Significant Revisions)
d. Group processing of minor modifications?
Response: i ¦ , see Title 129, Chapter I > i ion 004
3. If the EPA Regional office has formally asked you to re-open a permit,
were you able to provide EPA with a proposed determination within 90
days? (40 CFR 70.7(g)(2))
Response: . however, IN ID IE IE has not been formally asked by EPA Region 7 to ire-
open a permit.
If not, why not?
4. For those permits that have been issued, and where the permitted
facility has undergone a change, how many changes to the title V permit
have you processed?
Response: Since January 2015, NIDEE has processed and issue . nit
revisions, this does not include administrative amendments as they are
not tracked at this time.
a. What percentage of changes at the facilities are processed as:
i. Significant
Response: Since January 20 proximately 7% were processed as a significant
permit revision.
ii. Minor
Response: Since January 201 > ,>[-proximately 33% were processed as .> iinii ioir
permit revision.
21
-------
Response
Response
Response
I
Response
Response
Response
Response
Response
iii. Administrative
Unknown, IN ID IE IE currently is not tracking administrative amendments.
However, the majority of administrative amendmer aives are
for name changes at the facility,
b. Of all changes that you have, how many (or what percentages)
were:
i. Off-permit
loes not track off-permit changes since there is no permit revision
completed,
ii. 502(b)(10)
II ill «ll II ¦ loes not track 502(bu |Ot changes since there is no permit revision
completed,
5. How many days, on average, does it take to process (from application
receipt to final permit amendment):
a. a significant permit revision?
Since Janu 15, an average of approximately 150 days were spent
processing a significant permit revision.
b. a minor revision?
Since Janu 15, an average of approximately 86 days were spent
processing a minor permit revision,
c. an administrative revision?
currently is not tracking administrative amendments. However, the
administrative amendments IN ID IE IE receives are processed within the 60-
day requirement,
6. Have you taken longer than the part 70 timeframes of 18 months for
significant revision, 90 days for minor permit revisions and 60 days for
administrative? Explain.
At this time the only reason for significant and/or minor permit revisions
would exceed the pai neframes for issuance would be if a
construction and operating permit revisions were submitted at the same
time. Then there are times when the par rieframes are exceeded
due to waiting for the construction permit revision to be completed before
the operating permit revision can be completed.
7. What have you done to streamline the issuance of revisions?
By eliminating operating permit backlog has helped to reduce issuance
22
-------
till11- i'-i |» rmit revisions. Also. NE I II ¦-ives priority to completing inmor
permit revisions, so they are completed by the allotted timeframe.
8. What process do you use to track permit revision applications moving
through your system?
Response: IN ID IE IE has an internal tracking systei :el Spreadsheet) that tracks all
applications receivec ; system tracks the progress of the application
ii- ¦in receipt to issuance. An example is attached as Attach men ii II <
9. Have you developed guidance to assist permit writers and sources in
evaluating whether a proposed revision qualifies as an administrative
amendment, off-permit change, significant or minor revision, or requires
that the permit be reopened? If so, provide a copy.
Response: No, the assigned permit writer uses Title 111 1 haptni l > ,>s a guide in
determining if the application qualifies as a administrative amendment, off-
permit change, significant or minor revision or if the permit needs to be
reopened.
Response:
10. Do you require that source applications for minor and significant
permit modifications include the source's proposed changes to the permit?
Yes
Response: Yes
a. For minor modifications, do you require sources to explain their
change and how it affects their applicable requirements?
Response:
11. Do you require applications for minor permit modifications to contain a
certification by a responsible official, consistent with 70.5(d), that the
proposed modification meets the criteria for use of minor permit
modification procedures and a request that such procedures be used?
Yes
Response:
12. When public noticing proposed permit revisions, how do you identify
which portions of the permit are being revised? (e.g., narrative description
of change, highlighting, different fonts).
Only the portion of the permit that received changes is public noticed.
Response:
13. When public noticing proposed permit revisions, how do you clarify
that only the proposed permit revisions are open to comment?
Only the portion of the permit that received changes is public noticed.
23
-------
Permit Renewal Or Reopening
14. Have you begun to issue permit renewals?
Response: Yes
15. What are your plans for timely issuance of the renewals?
Response: Currently, all operating permit renewal applications submissions are
assign? . irmiit writer within 30 days of receipt with the goal of
issuance within 60 days of permit expiration,
16. Do you have a different application form for a permit renewal
compared to that for an original application? (e.g., are your application
renewal forms different from the forms for initial permits)
Response: , the current renewal application template can be found in Attachment
A
a. If yes, what are the differences? Are 1st time requirements (like
CAM, off permit changes, etc.) in a renewal application being
included in the renewal?
Response: The renewal application is based on the facilities current permit, then they
are to include a list of all permitting actions completed and any other non-
permitted changes made. The current renewal application template can be
found in Attachment A
17. Has issuance of renewal permits been "easier" than the original
permits? Explain.
Respon , with the inclusion of the permit renewal application it is much easier
to determine the changes made at the facility since the last permit
issuance. The time to draft the permit documents has reduced
tremendously as the permit writer is concentrating their efforts on the
changes made rather than having to review application forms of existing
equipment that hasn't changed to find the forms for new or changed
equipment. Not only does this save time for I it also saves the
source's time in preparing their renewal application.
18. How are you implementing the permit renewal process (ie., guidance,
checklist to provide to permit applicants)?
Response: The permit renewal application includes detailed instructions for the
applicant.
19. What % of renewal applications have you found to be timely and
complete?
Response: Approximately 99% of the renewal applications are timely and complete.
IN ID IE IE emails reminders to each permitted facility approximate!
months before permit expiration to remind them that they need to submit a
24
-------
renewal application,,
20. How many complete applications for renewals do you presently have
in-house ready to process?
As of May 1<''022, IN ID IE IE ha 1 applications for renewal in-house.
21. Have you been able to or plan to process these renewals within the
part 70 timeframe of 18 months? If not, what can EPA do to help?
Currently, all operating permit renewal applications submissions are
assigned to a permit writer within 30 days of receipt with the goal of
issuance within 60 days of permit expiration. At this time all permit
renewal applications are completed and issued within the onth
timeframe outlined in ps
22. Have you ever determined that an issued permit must be revised or
revoked to assure compliance with the applicable requirements?
No, Ihiowev 3 revoked all permits for two sources within the last
five years. The sources, Big Ox's air quality construction permit was
revoked due to non-compliance. All of AlltlEn's permits including their air
quality operating permit were revoked, however the permits were revoked
due to non-compliance in other media and the source losing their ability to
operate.
F. Compliance
1. Deviation reporting:
a. Which deviations do you require be reported prior to the semi-
annual monitoring report? Describe.
Response: Bellow are the requirements for reporting deviations as stated in Condition
III our Class II operating permits:
(2) The source shall report all deviations from permit
requirements, including those attributable to start-ups,
shutdowns or malfunctions, the probable cause of such
deviations, and any corrective actions or preventive
measures takei probable cause, corrective actions, or
preventive measures do not have to be provided if that
information has already been submitted in other reports to
till' II III «ll II such as foil - "I II' -.Mi however reported
deviations must reference these other reports. All reports of
deviations must be submitted within the time frame as per
Conditioni III i \)(2u,'il <1 and i- »ll« llow(Titlle 129, Chapter
11, Chapter 8, Section < "< > n > ¦! < and < "< 'mm . >nd Chapter
35, Sections 004 and 005).
Response:
Response:
Response:
25
-------
(a) Any deviation resulting from emergency or upset
conditions shall I« i- ported within tv i > working
days of the date on which the source first becomes
aware of the deviation iftlhie source wishes to assert
the affirmative defense authorized under Chapter 11
of Titlel29. The report may be submitted initially
without a certification by the responsible official, as
required by Conditic )ove, if an appropriate
certification is providedwithin ten ays
thereafter, together with
the information required under Condition! Ill i -u > >i d
any corrected or supplemental information required
concerning the deviation,
(b) Any deviation that poses an imminent and substantial
danger to public health, safety, or the environment
shall be reported as soon as is practicable. The report
may be submitted initially without a certification by a
responsible official in accordance with Conditioi
above, if an appropriate certification is provided within
t ys thereafter, together with any corrected or
supplemental information required concerning the
deviation,
(c) All other deviations shall be reported as per Condii 1),
(Conditi an be found in question 2 bellow)
b. Do you require that some deviations be reported by telephone?
Response: No, see response 1 .a. above for moire information about reporting,
c. If yes, do you require a followup written report? If yes, within
what timeframe?
Response: See response 1 .a. above for information about reporting,
d. Do you require that all deviation reports be certified by a
responsible official? (If no, describe which deviation reports are not
certified).
Respor
i. Do you require all certifications at the time of submittal?
Response: See response 1 .a. above for certification requirements.
ii. If not, do you allow the responsible official to "back certify"
deviation reports? If you allow the responsible official to
"back certify" deviation reports, what timeframe do you allow
for the followup certifications (e.g., within 30 days; at the
26
-------
time of the semi-annual deviation reporting)?
Response: See response 1 .a. above for certification requirements,
2. How does your program define deviation?
Response: Deviation is defined in Title 129, Chapter 1, Section as follows:
"Deviation" means a depairtur indicator range or work
practice for monitoring, consistent with any averaging period
specified for averaging the results of the monitoring.
Bellow is the definition of deviation as stated in Condition III 1) of our
Class II operating permits:
i 11 III I- ¦ uirce shall submit .mi- | -oirt of all instances of deviations from
permit requirements including monitoring requirements stated in the
permit every s lendar months to theNDEE The report for
the first six (6) months (January through Jui all be submitted
IbySeptembeir 30 of each year. The report for the second si>
months (July through December) shall be submitted by Mar of
the following year (Title 129, Chapter ctioin 004.03A).
Also see response la, above for information on the definition of
a deviation.
a. Do you require only violations of permit terms to be reported as
deviations?
Response: . unless the permit specifies differently,
b. Which of the following do you require to be reported as a
deviation (Check all that apply):
Response:
i. excess emissions excused due to emergencies
(pursuant to 70.6(g))
ii. excess emissions excused due to SIP provisions (cite the
specific state rule)
Response: IN II ill "III 1 ss not have an v .III ¦ xess emissions provisions.
iii. excess emissions allowed under NSPS or MACT SSM
provisions?
Response: No
iv. excursions from specified parameter ranges where such
excursions are not a monitoring violation (as defined in
CAM)
27
-------
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response: No
Response:
Response:
Response:
v. excursions from specified parameter ranges where such
excursions are credible evidence of an emission violation
vi. failure to collect data/conduct monitoring where such
failure is "excused":
A. during scheduled routine maintenance or
calibration checks
B. where less than 100% data collection is allowed
by the permit
Yes
Yes
C. due to an emergency
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
vii. Other? Describe.
Not Applicable
3. Do your deviation reports include:
a. the probable cause of the deviation?
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. any corrective actions taken?
c. the magnitude and duration of the deviation?
4. Do you define "prompt" reporting of deviations as more frequent than
semi-annual?
Yes
5. Do you require a written report for deviations?
6. Do you require that a responsible official certify all deviation reports?
28
-------
7. What is your procedure for reviewing and following up on:
a. deviation reports?
Response: III i- -mi Program ¦ '-mpliance staff review all deviation reports to
determine if all required information was provided and that the facility has
taken action to correct the issue.
b. semi-annual monitoring reports?
Response: 111> -mi Program ¦ '-Tripliance staff review all semi-annual monitoring
reports to determine if they contain all required information and that the
facility is in compliance with its permitted requirements,
c. annual compliance certifications?
Response: 111> -mi Program ¦ '-mpliance staff review all annual compliance
certification reports to determine if they contain all required information
and that the facility is in compliance with its permitted requirements.
8. What percentage of the following reports do you review?
a. deviation reports
Response: Vo
b. semi-annual monitoring reports
Response: Vo
c. annual compliance certification
Response: Vo
9. Compliance certifications
a. Have you developed a compliance certification form? If no, go
to question 7.
Respor
i. Is the certification form consistent with your rules?
Response , ¦ , See Attachment ¦ i i an example form and instructions.
ii. Is compliance based on whether compliance is
continuous or intermittent or whether the compliance
monitoring method is continuous or intermittent?
Response , ¦ , compliance is determined by both methods. II ill "III i- views the CoC
for continuous compliance with permitted requirements as well as whether the
monitori thod is continuous or intermittent.
29
-------
iii. Do you require sources to use the form? What
percentage do?
Response IN II ill «l II 1 ss not track who uses the form and who does not. II ill "III
does not require the source to use I 3 source can develop
and use their own form as long as it contains the required information,
iv. Does the form account for the use of credible evidence?
Response: Sources can submit supporting information (logs/records) to explain the
reason for the deviation and how it was corrected,
v. Does the form require the source to specify the monitoring
method used to determine compliance where there are options for
monitoring, including which method was used where more than one
method exists?
Response:
10. Excess emissions provisions:
a. Does your program include an emergency defense provision as
provided in 70.6(g)? If yes, does it:
Response: i ¦ , III' II >, Chapter 11
i. Provide relief from penalties?
Response No, howev i use enforcement discretion for emergency
events if the source has completed all required reporting and the event
meets the definition of an emergency event.
ii. Provide injunctive relief?
Response: No, howev i use enforcement discretion for emergency
events if the source has completed all required reporting and the event
meets the definition of an emergency event.
iii. Excuse noncompliance?
Response: No, howev i use enforcement discretion for emergency
events if the source has completed all required reporting and the event
meets the definition of an emergency event.
b. Does your program include a SIP excess emissions provision? If no,
go to 6.c. If yes does it:
Response: No
i. Provide relief from penalties?
ii. Provide injunctive relief?
30
-------
iii. Excuse noncompliance?
c. Do you require the source to obtain a written concurrence from
the PA before the source can qualify for:
i. the emergency defense provision?
Response: No
ii. the SIP excess emissions provision?
Response: II ill «l II does not have .> ..Ill ¦ xess emissions provision.
iii. NSPS/NESHAP SSM excess emissions provisions?
Response: No
11. Is your compliance certification rule based on:
a. the '97 revisions to part 70 - i.e., is the compliance certification
rule based on whether the compliance monitoring method is
continuous or intermittent; or:
b. the '92 part 70 rule - i.e., is the compliance certification rule
based on whether compliance was continuous or intermittent?
Response: Compliance is determined by both the 1992 part 70 rule and the 1997
revisions to pc
12. Any additional comments on compliance?
Response: None at this time
G. Resources & Internal Management Support
1. Are there any competing resource priorities for your "title V" staff in
issuing Title V permits?
a. If so, what are they?
Response: I .serating permit team's primary responsibility is reviewing
applications and drafting Class II (Title V) and Class III operating permits for
issuance.
Members of the team have helped in other areas of the air program as
needed, such as reviewing and drafting air quality construction permits
and regulation development. However, such activities are for the good of
the overall program and do not compete with the ability to issue timely and
quality operating permit.
31
-------
2. Are there any initiatives instituted by your management that
recognize/reward your permit staff for getting past barriers in implementing
the title V program that you would care to share?
Response: II ill «ll II has a number of avenues for recognizing excelled ¦ I ¦ .>iunites
receivin Hue Agate and/or a Cottonwood aire also eligible to be
"Employee of the Month,"
Blue Agate Award:
The intent of the Blue Agate Award is to recognize and thank employees
on the Blue Agate Recognition site.
Everyone in the agency will be able to ty|< mi i ill i ink you oir recognition i -I
a job well done for another individual oir group of individuals. There will be
no awards, just an open communication for ¦ staff recognition.
Supervisors are encouraged to recognize employe orts both verbally
a viriting. This can be as simple as a "thank you, you did a great job,"
to a llett ii I . ppireciation, I- ¦ | « -sitive comment in . |< rformance
feedback men ssting to the INIIPEE Welcome Page,
Peer recognition is also a great way to let your co-workers know you
appreciate their efforts. Again, a verbal thanks is the simplest way, up to
an i« I! in i1 lluding posting a thank you on the IDE II III ill .met, or sending their
supervisor a note.
All written recognition should include who, what, when, where, and why.
Comments will be reviewed prior to posting.
32
-------
The IDEE "Cottonwood" Award is a quasi-formal method of
recognizing individual agency employees who go "above and
beyond," in performing their duties durii i nil i < couirsi i III\s
year. The nomination will be completed on the agency intranet
and once completed will be electronically forwarded to the
Human Resource Section. The process may be kept
confidential at the ireqi )irriinee or the nominator.
Recipients will be recogni; annual employee recognition
ceremony
Receive an award up to $50 in value one time per year
o Employees can be nominated and selected more than once a
d year for the Cottonwood Award; however, the $50 award can
o only be received or ear.
i ttonwc «11 rtificate
s. Recipients from Jul i L I III m ouglh May 31 st will be submitt «< I i
consideration -I I he agen \ , . nnual Excellence in II . deirship Award.
n No other funds for refreshments or food are to be used for
0 these awards. Cottonwood,
t
All Cottonwood Award winners \ ognized during the
"1 following year's annual Employee Recognition Ceremony
3
v Criteria to be us Cottonwood award nomination
e submission
Innovation/Forward Thinking/Continuous Improvement
a* Teamwork/Collaboration
Serving by Example
f Customer Service Focused Excellence
o. Valuing People
r Aligning Resources
nl Vision adership/Proactive Management/Leadership by Example
^cess-Focused, Ethics, Transparency Focus
" Effective Communication
Coach and Develop Team Members/Staff Engagement
S
Staff are all ognized during meetings for their exemplary performance
and compliments from facilities are shared with the te well as
management.
3. How is management kept up to date on permit issuance?
Response supervisor is in constant communication with the division
administrator. The division administrator also reviews and signs each
operating permit that is issued.
33
-------
has an internal tracking system (Excel Spreadsheet) that tracks all
applications received, system tracks the process of the application
from receipt to issuance. An example is attached as Attachmer
iisiion Administrator keeps the Director and Deputies apprised of
potentially significant issues.
4. Do you meet on a regular basis to address issues and problems related
to permit writing?
Response: III i- ¦ aerating permit tenin in> ets weekly as a team to discuss updates on
assigned permits as well as discussions on permit challenges that are
happening. The operating permit team and construction permit tes et
monthly to discuss relevant topics to both teams. The entire Air Program
team meets on a quarterly basis to discuss program wide challenges as
well as discuss any new developments in the air program,
5. Do you charge Title V fees based on emission volume?
IRespon , the requirements for fees are found in 1 iille 129, Chapter 29,
a. If not, what is the basis for your fees?
b. What is your Title V fee?
Response: I urirent emissions fee is $50 per ton of regulated pollutant. The
fee rate is adjusted annually to assure that sufficient funds are available to
implement the Titl , ogram.
6. How do you track title V expenses?
Response: Staff code every 0.25 hour of work tiir _ ecific activity code. Each
title V an i 11 II i III ynthetic minor facility lhi<> .> i
-------
Response:
Response
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response
emissions fees aire received and tracked by NIDIEIE's Fiscal Section,
8. How many Title V permit writers does the agency have on staff
(number of FTE's)?
currently has 5 operating permit writers and one vacant position for
a total of 6 operating permit writers allotted and one supervisor,
9. Do the permit writers work full time on Title V?
No
a. If not, describe their main activities and percentage of time on
title V permits.
, erating permit team's primary responsibility is reviewing and
drafting Class II (Title V) and Class III operating permits for issuance,
b. How do you track the time allocated to Title V activities versus
other non-title V activities?
Staff code every hour of work time to a specific activity code. Each title V
facility has a unique project number code that is utilized on teammate's
timesheet that tracks all hours of activity for that facility,
10. Are you currently fully staffed?
No, the operating permit section currently has one vacant position which
was recently moved to the construction permit section to allow for cross
traini m modeler before the current modeler retires.
11. What is the ratio of permits to permit writers?
II ill «l II currently has 90 Cla; II Mcillift <> ¦ II > III i nhetic Minor
facilities and 42 Cllas: ilities. The current ratio of permits to permit
writers i
¦
Ratio of Permits to Permit Writer
(initial and renewal permits only)
2021
7.6
1
(2020
3 8
1
2
4 4
1
2
1
2017
6 2
1
2
r if\
5.6
1
12. Describe staff turnover.
has an average turnover of one permit writer per year for the last
seven years Sometimes it takes an extended period of time to find
qualified people to fill vacant positions.
35
-------
a. How does this impact permit issuance?
Response: re is a negative impact on the number of permits issued as there is
less people drafting permits. Also, when new people are hired there is a
learning curve for new staff as well as taking time with existing staff
mentoring and assisting the new staff.
b. How does the permitting authority minimize turnover?
Response By allowing flexible work schedules, compressed work weell-
days) and by helping each person develop short and long term career
goals.
I ill «ll I has also develop- ¦ '¦ .> [ob shadowing program that allows staff to
"shadow" other staff in different positions and in different programs allow
staff members to view other positions and determine if there is an interest
in a different position within the Agency This program will help place the
right people in the right position and will help retain qualified and
experienced people in the Agency
13. Do you have a career ladder for permit writers?
a. If so, please describe.
Response 3incy has an Environmental Specialist l/ll/lll ladder. Currently, all
positions in the Operating Permit Section are classified as Environmental
Specialists II. Shoulh" , sition and/or person qualify, a request to
upgrade to an Environmental Specialist III is available. Additionally, staff
in good standing are eligible to apply for any vacant position in the Agency
14. Do you have the flexibility to offer competitive salaries?
Response No
15. Can you hire experienced people with commensurate salaries?
Response No
16. Describe the type of training given to your new and existing permit
writers.
Response I new and existing staff participate in available Central States Air
Resource Agencies iSAIIKA) training and use customized and
standard permit formats as well as standardized permit conditions
whenever possible
36
-------
Permitting staff also meet on a routine basis to give presentations on
specific subjects that will help improve permitting practices as well as
discuss permitting challenges. NDEE is completed process improvement
activities to help improve our applications, factsheets and permits. These
processes have resulted in streamlining our work to be able to complete
and issue permits quicker and has improved our final product.
NDEE encourages staff to make facility visits while working on their
projects if to help them better understand their projects. Both new and
existing staff is required to complete a minimum of 30 hours of training per
calendar year relevant to their position.
Each new and existing staff has the opportunity to have a dedicated
meeting meet with Section Supervisor on a weekly or monthly basis to
discuss projects aside all informal project discussions . Existing staff is
paired on a rotating monthly basis with team members from the
Construction Permit Section to respond to hotline email/phone calls; this
promotes cross training between the two programs.
17. Does your training cover:
Response: Yes
Response:
Response:
Response:
Yes
Yes
a. how to develop periodic and/or sufficiency monitoring in
permits?
b. how to ensure that permit terms and conditions are enforceable
as a practical matter?
c. how to write a Statement of Basis?
18. Is there anything that EPA can do to assist/improve your training?
Please describe.
NDEE appreciates the working relationship with EPA Region 7 and the
willingness to assist us as needed. We suggest continuing to offer and
develop new training opportunities for permitting staff as well as to
continue with the 4 states meetings at the Region 7 office on at least an
annual basis.
19. How has the PA organized itself to address Title V permit issuance?
Response: The operating permit team has set goals to draft and issue all permit
renewals within 210 active days of assignment with a goal of issuing the
renewal permit within 60 days of existing permit expiration. Currently all
complete renewal applications are assigned to a permit writer within 30
37
-------
days of receipt.
The goal initial operating permit applications are also to have them drafted
and issued within 210 days of assignment. Currently all complete
applications are assigned to a permit writer within 30 days of receipt.
20. Overall, what is the biggest internal roadblock to permit issuance from
the prospective of Resources and Internal Management Support?
Response: As a state regulatory agency, we are limited in what we are able to do to
attract highly qualified, experienced personnel above the minimum hiring
rate. We compete with private industry, consulting, and federal agencies
to retain staff. This is not an NDEE issue, but a state-wide issue.
Environmental Justice Resources
21. Do you have Environmental Justice (EJ) legislation, policy or general
guidance which helps to direct permitting efforts?
Response: NDEE does not have legislation or a formal policy or guidance expressly
addressing environmental justice. However, NDEE, in the administration
of its programs and activities, seeks to ensure fair treatment of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and meaningful
involvement of the public with respect to our environmental programs.
NDEE has placed a non-discrimination statement prominently on its
webpage and designated a deputy director as the point of contact for any
questions. Other examples include (1) extensive stakeholder outreach in
the regulation development process, (2) public information sessions
associated with draft permits in addition to public hearings, (3) a robust
citizen complaint system and an online "report a problem", (4) compliance
assistance on NESHAPs and NSPS, (5) an enforcement goal to protect
and reduce risk to human health and the environment, (6) grant
programs, and (7) the ability to utilize limited language translation
services.
If so, may EPA obtain copies of appropriate documentation?
22. Do you have an in-house EJ office or coordinator, charged with
oversight of EJ related activities?
Response: Please see the response to question 21 above.
23. Have you provided EJ training / guidance to your permit writers?
Response: Please see the response to question 21 above.
24. Do the permit writers have access to demographic information
necessary for EJ assessments? (e.g., soci-economic status, minority
38
-------
populations, etc.)
Response: Please see the response to question Dve.
25. When reviewing an initial or renewal application, is any screening for
potential EJ issues performed? If so, please describe the process and/or
attach guidance.
Response: Please see the response to question Dve.
H. Title V Benefits
1. Compared to the period before you began implementing the Title V
program, does the Title V staff generally have a better understanding of:
a. NSPS requirements?
b. The stationary source requirements in the SIP?
c. The minor NSR program?
d. The major NSR/PSD program?
e. How to design monitoring terms to assure compliance?
f. How to write enforceable permit terms?
Response: current operating permit team was not working prior to the
implementation of the Titl- \ program lb most experienced permit writer
in the operating permit team started in 2 trives for continuous
improvement and collaborates with the construction permit team and the
compliance team to assure permits are consistent and practically
enforceable.
2. Compared to the period before you began implementing the Title V
program, do you have better/more complete information about:
a. Your source universe including additional sources previously
unknown to you?
Response: As stated in question 1 above, the current operating permit team was not
working prior to the implementation of the Title V program. >st
experienced permit writer in the operating permit team started in 2012.
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable.
39
-------
However, since the institution of the operating permit program i"' lb II >>nd
Cllas e locating and tracking facilities has improved,
b. Your source operations (e.g., better technical understanding of
source operations; more complete information about emission units
and/or control devices; etc.)?
Response: As stated in question 1 above, the current operating permit team was not
working prior to the implementation of the Title V prograr most
experienced permit writer in the operating permit team started in 2012.
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable.
However, since the institution of the operating permit program c 'II * II >>nd
Cllas has received moire detailed information from sources to
help understand their processes and how they work and any changes that
are instituted.
c. Your stationary source emissions inventory?
Response: As stated in question 1 above, the current operating permit team was not
working prior to the implementation of the Title V prograr most
experienced permit writer in the operating permit team started in 2012.
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable.
All Class I and Class II permitted sources in Nebraska are required to
submit emissions inventories via t ;te and Local Emissions Inventory
Syst sarly basis. All other sources (low emitters and no
operating permit ireqi st submit an emissions inventory via SILIEIS
every three years at a minimum or when requested lb;
d. Applicability and more enforceable (clearer) permits?
Response: As stated in question 1 above, the current operating permit team was not
working prior to the implementation of the Title V prograr most
experienced permit writer in the operating permit team started in 2012.
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable.
is always striving to improve our permits to be moire concise and
easier to understand as well as present enforceable conditions.
40
-------
3. In issuing the Title V permits:
a. Have you noted inconsistencies in how sources had previously
been regulated (e.g., different emission limits or frequency of
testing for similar units)? If yes, describe.
Response: No
b. Have you taken (or are you taking) steps to assure better
regulatory consistency within source categories and/or between
sources? If yes, describe.
Response: , siratimg permit team works with the construction permit team to draft
permit conditions that are consistent as possible for both programs.
We also review different source categories to determine consistency
within each category, so we are treating each facility with the same type
process consistently.
II ill «ll II strives to be consistent with facilities of the sarn- i> \ >e (i.e. ethanoll
plants, municipal power plants) by reviewing these as a group and
individually to determine that we are not being inconsistent in how we are
permitting the facilities.
4. Based on your experience, estimate the frequency with which potential
compliance problems were identified through the permit issuance process:
Never Occasionally Frequently Often
a.
prior to submitting an application
~
X
~
~
b.
prior to issuing a draft permit
~
X
~
~
c.
after issuing a final permit
~
X
~
~
5. Based on your experience with sources addressing compliance
problems identified through the Title V permitting process, estimate the
general rate of compliance with the following requirements prior to
implementing Title V:
Never Occasionally Frequently Often
a. NSPS requirements (including failure
to identify an NSPS as applicable) ~ ~ ~ ~
b. SIP requirements ~ ~ ~ ~
c. Minor NSR requirements (including
the requirement to obtain a permit) ~ ~ ~ ~
41
-------
d. Major NSR/PSD requirements (including
the requirement to obtain a permit) ~ ~ ~ ~
Response: As stated in question 1 above, the current operating permit team was not
working prior to the implementation of the Title V pirogirair most
experienced permit writer in the operating permit team started in 2012,
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable,
6. What changes in compliance behavior on the part of sources have you seen
in response to Title V? (Check all that apply.)
a. increased use of self-audits?
Response:
b. increased use of environmental management systems?
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
c. increased staff devoted to environmental management?
d. increased resources devoted to environmental control systems
(e.g., maintenance of control equipment; installation of improved
control devices; etc.)?
e. increased resources devoted to compliance monitoring?
f. better awareness of compliance obligations?
h. other? Describe.
7. Have you noted a reduction in emissions due to the Title V program?
i ¦ , IN ID IE IE has issued approximately <1 ¦ lass III nthetic Minor Permits
to avoid Titl- \ ll< > limiting the souro II III and actual emissions to
below major source thresholds, there are no annual emissions fees
assessed to the facility. Also, for Title V sources there is a financial
incentive to decrease emissions as much as possible to decrease
emissions fees p;
42
-------
The table below illustrate iinuall fee rate per ton since calendar
year 2006,
State Fisc r
ate ($/ton)
.Lite Fisc.'I i ¦ air
ite ($/ton)
2006
38
2015
67
2007
51
2016
70
2008
57
2017
71
2009
57
78
2010
62
2019
78
2011
70
2020
70
2012
66
2021
65
2013
64
2022
50
2014
65
2023
50
a. Did that lead to a change in the total fees collected either due to
sources getting out of title V or improving their compliance?
Response:
b. Did that lead to a change in the fee rate (dollars/ton rate)?
Response: . IN D IE IE reevaluates the emissions fee rates every year to determine
the amount per ton needed to provide the funding necessary to maintain
the Title V program. See Appendi the latest annual assessment of
the current fee irate.
8. Has title V resulted in improved implementation of your air program in
any of the following areas due to Title V:
a. netting actions
Response: No
b. emission inventories
Response: . Title V sources have improved the accuracy of their emissions for
their emissions inventory report to reduce the amount of emissions fees
paid,
c. past records management (e.g., lost permits)
Response: No, however, IN ID IE IE is continually improving our record management
system to meet the needs of the agency.
Response:
d. enforceability of PTE limits (e.g., consistent with guidance on
enforceability of PTE limits such as the June 13, 1989 guidance)
e. identifying source categories or types of emission units with
pervasive or persistent compliance problems; etc.
43
-------
Response: i ¦ ,the permitting team reviews the source's file to determii i- ni ihere
have been compliance problems during the daft permit process and
discusses with Compliance Team if there are possible remedies to help
improve compliance.
f. clarity and enforceability of NSR permit terms
Response: No
g. better documentation of the basis for applicable requirements
(e.g., emission limit in NSR permit taken to avoid PSD; throughput
limit taken to stay under MACT threshold)
Response: . the operating permit team is continually working to improve the
documentation for the basis of applicable limits to help the source and
public understand the purpose for the limit.
h. emissions trading programs
Response: No
i. emission caps
Response: . PTE caps established though the synthetic minor program allow the
source to avoid the Title V program.
j. other (describe)
Response: No
9. If yes to any of the above, would you care to share how this
improvement came about? (E.g., increased training; outreach; targeted
enforcement)?
Response Many of the changes have come about as the program has matured over
the last 20 years Also, NDEE has completed several process
improvements exercises to help us improve our process of drafting and
issuing quality air operating permits.
10. Has Title V changed the way you conduct business?
Response Not recently, howeve is constantly striving to improve our
permitting process and communication with the regulated community as
well as the public.
a. Are there aspects of the Title V program that you have extended
to other program areas (e.g., require certification of accuracy and
completeness for pre-construction permit applications and reports;
increased records retention; inspection entry requirement language
in NSR permits). If yes, describe.
Response Not within the past seven years
44
-------
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
Response:
b. Have you made changes in how NSR permits are written and
documented as a result of lessons learned in Title V (e.g., permit
terms more clearly written; use of a statement of basis to document
decision making)? If yes, describe.
strives for continuous improvement and collaborates with the
construction permit team and the compliance team to assure permits are
consistent and practically enforceable.
c. Do you work more closely with the sources? If yes, describe.
i ¦ , we are in communication with the sour* ¦ ii ¦ m start to finish during
the drafting of the permit documents process prior to public notice.
d. Do you devote more resources to public involvement? If yes, describe.
No
e. Do you use information from Title V to target inspections and/or
enforcement?
Yes
f. Other ways? If yes, describe.
No
11. Has the Title V fee money been helpful in running the program? Have
you been able to provide:
III I- I nil' \ I- ¦ money collected is used to administer the Title V program
in Nebraska. There is sufficient funding collected each year to administer
the program.
Response:
Response:
Response:
No
No
No
a. better training?
b. more resources for your staff such as CFRs and computers?
c. better funding for travel to sources?
d. stable funding despite fluctuations in funding for other state
programs?
Response:
e. incentives to hire and retain good staff?
Response: No
45
-------
Response:
f. are there other benefits of the fee program? Describe.
No
12. Have you received positive feedback from citizens?
Response: Not recently
13. Has industry expressed a benefit of Title V? If so, describe.
Response: Not recently
14. Do you perceive other benefits as a result of the Title V program? If
so, describe.
Respoir lie V program benefits the regulated community, public, EPA, and
any other interested parties as it provides an allll-encompassing look at the
air pollution sources cillity, as well as the requirements those
sources are subject 1- II <¦ cause Title \ [-lovides a complete review of all
air emissions points and th< , jiirements, the Title V permit review
serves as a source-wide look at the emission limits, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting set in the construction permits and may add
additional monitoring to protect ambient air quality standards and emission
limits. The Titll view may identify conflicts in language or limits
among construction permits that have been issued over several years or
decades and work w construction permit team and the facility to
resolve these differences.
15. Other comments on benefits of title V?
Response: Since the inception of the Title V program there has been an increase in
c nication with facilities and an increased understanding of their
processes whi- II i in."Ikes us better prepared i- 3t the needs of the
regulated community.
Good Practices not addressed elsewhere in this
questionnaire
Are any of the practices employed that improve the quality of the permits, or
other aspects of title V program that are not addressed elsewhere in this
questionnaire?
Response: II ill "III offers the low emitter program to sources who: ¦ II III i above
major source thresholds and their actual emissions are bellow operating
permittii 5sholds (less than 50% of major thresholds). The source
must show sar history of actual emissions bellow the thresholds. The
requirements for the low emitter program are outlined in Tith apteir
5, Secti
46
-------
EPA assistance not addressed elsewhere in this
questionnaire
Is there anything else EPA can do to help your title V program?
Response: I appreciates Region 7's continued support and willingness to assist
us with our permitting questions. The continuation of the 4 state calls and
the yearly in-pers state meeting at Region 7 is a valuable training
resource for us,.
47
-------
ATTACHMENT A
48
-------
NEBRASKA
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal
Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
Agency Use Only
Program ID:
Air
SGURCE NAME:
DATE:
NDEE FACILITY ID#:
PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR EACH SECTION PRIOR TO COMPLETING THIS FORM.
Please type responses or use black ink. Do NOT use pencil.
Who Needs to Reapply?
1) Owners or operators of sources operating under a current Class I/Class II Operating Permit must submit an
application for permit renewal to the Department not less than 6 months and not more than 18 months before the
expiration date of the pennit.
What Must Be Submitted?
2) The intent of this document is to streamline the Class I/Class II permit renewal process. At a minimum, the owner
or operator must submit the enclosed application, which includes (if applicable) general information,
facility/process changes, compliance plan changes, new applicable requirements and changes, and certification by a
responsible official. Note: New or revised regulations or standards may require changes from the existing permit.
These may include the Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM) rules, 40 CFR Part 64; New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS), 40 CFR Part 60; National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, 40 CFR Part 61;
and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for source categories (MACT), 40 CFR Part 63.
Documents and Information to Assemble Before Completing Application
3) The owner or operator should assemble the following information/documents before completing the renewal
application:
a. Current Class I/Class II permit including any re-openings, modifications, amendments, and/or off-permit source
modifications.
b. Construction permits and approvals issued during the current permit term.
c. Consent agreements and compliance schedules issued during the current permit term.
d. Information on any other significant source or permit changes.
e. Information on new or revised regulations or standards that may require changes to the current permit.
Records Requests/Searches
4) Electronic Records (MS Word. MS Excel, or Adobe .pdf) may be requested at:
Fax: 402-471-2909
Email: ndee.records(3inebraska.gov
U.S.P.S.: NDEE Records Management Section
P.O. Box 98922
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
Location: NDEE Records Management Section
245 Fallbrook Boulevard
Lincoln, NE 68521
-or-
Public Records Search Online (Adobe .pdf format only):
https://ecmp.nebraska.gov/publi caccess/viewer.aspx?&MyQueryID=340
49
-------
Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Application
ci f-r or- f Nv ;nd * v Form 8.0, Section 1.1
NDEE Information
5) NDEE Facility ID#:
Owner Information
6) Name:
7) Mailing Address:
8) City:
9) State: Nebraska
10) Zip:
11) If the owner is a business, is it incorporated? ~ No
If Yes, name of state where incorporated:
EH Yes
12) Is_the source located within 50 miles of another state, tribal land, local air quality agency or a national park?
' ' II Vpc Tf Vpo 111 rl 1 e+a+p>feV
d N/iicc^,,r! HH South Dakota ^
No ''Yes iLYcs. indicatgayhich stgte{s):
' Colorado
y i r
I. ¦ilowa '' Kansas '' Mis
'' Tribal Land '' OAQC LLCHD'' National Parks
iissoun
Wyoming
Source Information
13) Name of Source:
14) Source Description:
15) SIC Code(s):
16) NAICS Code(s):
17) Physical Address:
18) City:
19) State: Nebraska
20) Zip:
21) County:
%
% Section:
Township:
Range:
22) UTM Coordinates: Zone:
X:
~n
"B
Y:
23) Is the source located on leased property?
No
Yes (If yes, complete 24-28 below)
24) Property Owner Name:
25) Property Owner Mailing Address:
26) Property Owner City:
27) State:
28) Zip:
Source Contact Information
29) Contact Person:
30) Contact Person's Title or Responsibility:
31) Phone Number:
32) Alt. Phone Number:
33) Fax Number:
34) E-mail Address:
35) ^Should the NDEE contact S|
' No (If No, skip to 42)
pmeone other than the Source Contact for questions?
' Yes (If Yes, fill in 36-41 below)
36) Additional Contact's Name:
37) Additional Contact's Company:
38) Phone Number:
39) Alt. Phone Number:
40) Fax Number:
41) E-mail Address:
Contact Information (continued)
42) Draft permit documents should be sent to:'' Source Contact '' Additional Contact'' Other (fill in 43-51)
43) Draft Document Recipient's Name and Title:
44) Draft Document Recipient's Mailing Address:
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
fviiPKD A...CK A
I N L L/ % # \ O I \/ \
fi r«T OF- f Nv ItCONW.'V'' iND (
Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
45) Draft Document Recipient's City:
46) State:
47) Zip:
48) Phone Number:
49) Alt. Phone Number:
50) Fax Number:
51) E-mail Address:
Operating Schedule
52) p-piis soutjcc, operated seasonally?
Yes
u
No
If Yes, give range of months:
53) Operating Hours of source (seasonal and non-seasonal facilities):
Hours per Day:
Days per Week:
Weeks per Year:
Project Information
54) Xyjpe of Permit:
Class I
J=j Class II - Synthetic Minor
'' Class II - Natural Minor
55) Class I soppe only: Are you requesting a permit shield?
Yes No (IfYes, complete Form 1.0, Section 1.2: Renewal Permit
Shield) (If No, continue to step 56)
56) Have there been any changes to the source since your current operating permit was issued?
'' No; If there have been no changes to the source since your current operating permit was issued, skip to step 62.
~
Yes; Proceed to step 57.
Permitting Information
57) Has your source received any permits or determinations from NDEE since your current operating permit was
issued?
'' Yes 1'No IfYes, use the table below to provide a brief description of each construction permit (CP),
operating permit (OP) revision, low emitter (LE) determination, no-permit-required (NPR) determination obtained
from the NDEE, as well as any re-openings or amendments (attach additional sheets if needed).
Date Issued
Type
Brief Description
~
CP
~
OP
~
LE
~
NPR
~
Other
~
CP
~
OP
~
LE
~
NPR
~
Other
~
CP
~
OP
~
LE
~
NPR
~
Other
Source Description
58) Only include a source description for the changes that have occurred at the source. Do not include information
that has not changed. On separate sheet(s) of paper, provide a detailed narrative description of the changes that
have occurred at the source since issuance of the current operating permit. This should include general information,
facility/process changes, production changes, and compliance plan/new applicable requirements and changes.
Include all new, removed, and/or revised emission points, emission units, pollution control equipment, and
identification numbers. The narrative should complement any updated source layout (59) and process flow
diagrams (60).
Updated Source Description: '' Yes '' No
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Application
ci f-r or- f Nv ;nd * v Form 8.0, Section 1.1
Source Layout Diagram
59) Only include a source layout diagram if changes have occurred at the source. If a source layout diagram is
included, please highlight all changes. On a separate sheet(s) of paper, provide an updated detailed diagram
or site drawing that includes all buildings, stacks, emission points and units, control equipment, tanks, etc.
identified in this application. Make sure all elements in the drawing are properly identified, drawn to scale, and
consistent with other sections of this application. The source layout diagram should show the location of all
buildings, structures, stacks, and property boundaries. Fences or other public access restrictions should be
shown or identified and described. Be sure to identify adjacent roads and include a north arrow. Include an
effective date for the diagram. .. ..
Updated Source Layout Diagram: '' Yes '' No
Process Flow Diagram
60) Only include a process flow diagram if changes have occurred at the source. If a process flow diagram is
included, please highlight all changes. On a separate sheet(s) of paper, provide an updated flow chart(s) that
includes all processes, process equipment, stacks, air pollution control equipment, and fuel burning equipment
for only the changes identified in this application. When finished, this diagram should show how materials
(including fuel) flow through each changed process. Make sure all emission points and units are identified and
consistent with other sections of the ap.pl icatiop-that identify changes. Include an effective date for the diagram.
Updated Process Flow Diagram: '' Yes '' No
Source/Process Changes
61) NDEE To describe any changes to the source and/or processes, complete: "Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.3: Source/Process Changes" located at dee.ne.gov.
(This should include all new equipment or process changes as well as any equipment that has been removed or
modified) .. ..
Form 8.0, Section 1.3 included: '' Yes '' No
Risk Management Plan
62) Is your source subject to Clean Air Act Section 112r? *=!. Yes 'p' No
a. If Yes, have you prepared a Risk Management Plan? ''Yes '' No
b. Have you submitted your Risk Management Plan to thc_NDEE. State Emergency Response Commission,
and your Local Emergency Planning Committee? ''Yes '' No
Potential To Emit (PTE) Calculations
63) Calculate the current source wide PTE, incorporating all changes to PTE since the current operating permit
was issued (if applicable). . . . .
a. Has the PTE changed from the current air operating permit? ''Yes '' No
If Yes, continue to "b." below.
If No, please include the PTE spreadsheet from your current air operating permit Factsheet attachment.
b. This PTE update should include all new or revised emission points, any updated emission factors, recent
stack test results, Construction Permit limits, etc. Removed equipment should not be included.
Note: Ethanol sources are recommended to use the "Universal Ethanol PTE Spreadsheet" located at
dee.ne.gov
New or Revised Applicable Regulations/Requirements
64) For any changes since the issuance of the existing operating permit that are subject to 40 CFR § 60, 61 or 63,
and/or CAM (40 CFR § 64) indicate which specific subparts apply and the affected sources. Using: "Air
Quality Operating Permit Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.4: New or Changed Requirements" located at
dee.ne.gov for applicable NSPS, NESHAP and/or Title 129 requirements, give a detailed description whether
an NSPS, NESHAP (40 CFR § 61 and/or 63), Title 129 requirement and/or CAM apply, or appear to apply but
>021 Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Application
ci f-r or- f Nv ;nd * v Form 8.0, Section 1.1
do not. This will include all new or revised regulations that have become applicable to both new and existing
equipment since the current operating permit was issued. If applicable, include NSPS or NESHAP compliance
plan changes. I. ..
Form 8.0, Section 1.4 included: ^ Yes ^ No ..
Form 8.0, Section 1.2 included: '' Yes '' No '' Not Applicable
Documenting Changes to the Existing Operating Permit
65) To identify changes to the NDEE, it is recommended for the source to complete the following:
a. Identify specifically which portions of the existing air operating permit requiring change(s).
i. On the existing permit highlight the permit condition(s) or language that needs to be changed.
b. On the existing permit, beneath where the condition(s) or language needs to be changed include proposed
suggested language use red bolded italicized underlined font for each proposed suggested language
change(s).
Documents to Attach to Air Operating Permit Renewal Application
66) The following documents should be attached to the air operating permit renewal application (if applicable):
Check the box if the document has been included as an attachment
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Copy of only the Condition(s) from the existing Class I/Class II permit that were identified as changed in
Step 65, including:
!=! Summary of each change
!=! New suggested language (optional)
'' Track changes in MS Word (optional)
PTE Calculations (required-Step 63)
Air Quality Operating Permit Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.2: Renewal Permit Shield (if completed in Step
55)
Updated Source Description (if completed in Step 58)
Updated Source Layout Diagram (if completed in Step 59)
Updated Process Flow Diagram (if completed in Step 60)
Air Quality Operating Permit Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.3: Source/Process Changes (if completed in
Step 61)
Air Quality Operating Permit Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.4: New or Changed Requirements (if completed
in Step 64)
CAM plan (if new or revised only-Step 64)
Submitting Air Operating Permit Renewal Application to the NDEE
67) What do I need to submit to the NDEE?
^ Submit two (2) signed paper copies of the complete renewal application (including attachments) to:
NDEE or NDEE
Air Program Air Program
P.O. Box 98922 245 Fallbrook Boulevard
Lincoln, NE 68509 Lincoln, NE 68521
1 Submit one (1) electronic copy in MS Word format of Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1 and applicable Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Sections 1.2, 1.3 and/or 1.4
>021 Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
Air Quality Operating Permit
Renewal Application
ci f-r or- f Nv ;nd * v Form 8.0, Section 1.1
and the Conditions(s) from the existing Class I/Class II permit and/or CAM plant that were identified as
changed in step 65 by email to NDEEAirQuality@nebraska.gov
^ Submit one (1) electronic copy of the PTE calculations in MS Excel format, by email to
NDEEAirQuality@nebraska.gov
Responsible Official Certification Statements
68) Compliance Certification
'' I hereby certify that, based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the source that emitsair
pollutants, which is identified in this application and that is subject to the applicable requirements, NSPS,
NESHAP, Title 129 and/or CAM, identified in Air Quality Operating Permit Renewal Form 8.0, Section 1.4 New
or Changed Requirements
1. Is in compliance with all applicable requirements, except as described in Permit Shield Table on Air
Quality Operating Renewal Permit Form 8.0, Section 1.2;
2. Will continue to comply with all applicable requirements; and,
3. Will comply with all applicable requirements for which compliance is not currently achieved.
69) .Truth and Accuracy Certification
I certify under penalty of law that, based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the
statements and information contained in this Air Quality Operating Permit application are true, accurate, and
complete. I certify that all hard copies of this application are identical in content.
70) Electronic Copy Certification (only when an electronic copy is submitted with the hard copy application)
' I certify under penalty of law that, based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the
statements and information contained in the electronic copy of the Air Quality Operating Permit application are
identical in content to the hard copy submittal.
Responsible Official Certification Signature
71) Responsible Official Certification (see instructions for signatory requirements):
Typed or Printed Name of Responsible Official Title
Signature of Responsible Official Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
Questions?
Contact the Air Quality Program - Operating Permits Section at 402-471-2189 or (Permit Hotline) 877-834-0474,
NDEEAirOualitv@nebraska.gov or visit the NDEE website: dee.ne.gov
Produced by: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, P. O. Box 98922, Lincoln, NE 68509-8922; phone
(402)471-2186. For this and other related information visit the NDEE website at dee.ne.sov,
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
i\ Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
CEPT OF ENVIRONMENT AMD £t«e₯ Form 8.0, Section 1.2: Permit Shield
SOURCE NAME:
DATE:
NDEE FACILITY ID#:
IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW PRIOR TO COMPLETING THIS
FORM.
Please type responses or use black ink. Do NOT use pencil.
Permit shields (as defined in Title 129, Chapter 8, Section 014) only apply to Class I operating permits. You
may request protection (e.g. permit shield) from enforcement action and citizen lawsuits for failure to comply
with applicable requirements omitted from, or incorrectly addressed in, the operating permit received by your
source. You may also request a permit shield from requirements that appear to be applicable to your source but
are not; however, you must include in the permit application an explanation of why each requirement is not
applicable in order to receive a permit shield. A permit shield protects your source as long as the source is in
compliance with the operating permit conditions. For more fact sheet information concerning permit shields,
please read the information starting on page 2 of this document.
1) Do you have a current permit shield in place? ~ Yes DNo
If Yes, proceed to Question 2 (below) If No, skip to the Permit Shield Table (below)
2) Do you want a shield for the same requirements and the same reasoning as your current permit shield?
~ Yes DNo
If No, identify the applicable requirements or changes to the existing permit shield.
Permit Shield Table
Emission Point(s)
Requirement (Citation)
Reason(s) For Permit Shield
(Why Requirement May or May Not Apply)
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
i\ Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
CEPT OF ENVIRONMENT AMD £t«e₯ Form 8.0, Section 1.2: Permit Shield
What is the purpose of a Permit Shield?
The Federal Clean Air Act and Title 129-Nebraska Air Quality Regulations allow a major source, as defined in
Title 129, Chapter 2, to have a permit shield in its operating permit. The permit shield can protect the source
from enforcement action by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and/or the Nebraska
Department of Environment and Energy (NDEE) as well as public citizen suits. A permit shield provides
protection under the following specific circumstances (more details later in this fact sheet):
Failure of the source to comply with an applicable requirement that was incorrectly addressed in the
source's operating permit and/or
Failure of the source to comply with an applicable requirement that was deemed not applicable in the
source's operating permit due to an incorrect NDEE determination that the requirement was not
applicable.
A permit shield only provides protection for those requirements addressed in the permit shield condition of the
operating permit. For the permit shield to be protective, the source must comply with the requirements in the
operating permit. Note that a permit shield does not protect a source from failure to comply with requirements
that become applicable after issuance of the operating permit. Nor does a permit shield provide protection if
inaccurate information is provided in an operating permit application that leads to an inaccurate NDEE
determination of applicability.
How does my source obtain a permit shield?
Title 129, Chapter 7, Section 006.02K allows a major source to request a permit shield in its operating permit
application. A permit shield may be requested for an applicable requirements) of an emission unit and/or a
requirement(s) that appears to be applicable to an emission unit at the source but is not.
What applicable requirements can be in a permit shield request?
An applicable requirement in a permit shield request can be from Title 129, a federal regulation, or a state
implementation plan. The requirement must apply to an emission unit at the source. Examples of applicable
requirements that can be included in a permit shield request are:
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP);
New Source Performance Standard (NSPS); and
Title 129, Chapter 20 opacity requirements when another opacity standard applies, such as an opacity
limit in a NSPS.
What requirements cannot be included in a permit shield request?
A permit shield cannot be requested by a source for a requirement that does not apply or appear to apply to a
specific emission unit. For example, a source cannot request a permit shield for a NSPS for boilers when the
source does not have a boiler. A source cannot request a permit shield for Title 129 in its entirety or for an
entire chapter within Title 129 because these are not emission unit specific. For example, a source cannot
request a permit shield for Title 129, Chapter 18 because this chapter adopts NSPS by reference and thus is not
specific to an emission unit.
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
i\ Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
CEPT OF ENVIRONMENT AMD £t«e₯ Form 8.0, Section 1.2: Permit Shield
How is a permit shield requested for applicable requirements?
The source must identify in its operating permit application each specific affected emission unit and the
applicable requirement for which the source wants a permit shield. The request must identify the specific
emission unit by name and identification number, include the citation of the applicable requirement, and explain
why a permit shield is being requested. The NDEE may request additional information during its review of the
permit shield request. Once the review of the permit shield request is complete, the NDEE will either grant or
deny the permit shield request. If the request is granted, the permit shield will be incorporated into the source's
Class I operating permit.
How is a permit shield requested for requirements that appear to apply but do not?
A source can also request in its operating permit application a permit shield from a requirement that appears to
be applicable to an emission unit but actually is not. The request must at a minimum include the following:
Citation of the requirement that appears to be applicable but is not,
Emission unit(s) that appears to be subject to the requirement, and
Explanation of why the requirement is not applicable to the emission unit(s).
Be sure to include enough detail in an explanation to make the case that a requirement is not applicable to the
emission unit(s). The NDEE may request additional information during its review of this part of the permit
shield. Once the review of the permit shield request is complete, the NDEE will either grant or deny the permit
shield. If the request is granted, the permit shield for requirements that appear to be applicable but are not will
be incorporated into the source's Class I operating permit. Note that a permit shield that is granted based on
inaccurate application information is not valid.
The following is an example of a requirement that appears to be applicable but is not and can thus be included
in a permit shield request: a source has a storage tank that was constructed after the applicability date of the
NSPS Subpart Kb, which applies to volatile organic liquid storage vessels (volatile organic liquids can be
gasoline, solvents, etc.), and meets the size requirement of the NSPS. The material stored by the source in the
storage tank has a vapor pressure less than the minimum vapor pressure of stored liquid that would make the
NSPS applicable. Therefore, Subpart Kb appears to be applicable to the source's storage tank but actually is not.
What is not affected by a permit shield?
In accordance with Title 129, Chapter 8, Section 014.03. any permit shield granted by the NDEE cannot affect:
The emergency provisions of Nebraska Revised Statute §81-1507 of the State Act;
Liability for any violation of applicable requirements or applicable requirements under the Act prior to
or at the time of permit issuance;
The applicable requirements of acid rain provisions in Title 129, Chapter 26;
The authority of the NDEE or the USEPA to obtain information; or
Any other permit provisions, terms, or conditions, including, but not limited to, construction permits
issued pursuant to Chapter 17 or permits issued pursuant to other State authorities and Titles.
Any request by a source for a permit shield for any of the above will be denied by the NDEE.
>021 Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
i\ Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
CEPT OF ENVIRONMENT AMD £t«e₯ Form 8.0, Section 1.2: Permit Shield
What if a requirement is misinterpreted?
If the NDEE finds that an applicable requirement was improperly addressed or not included in the operating
permit through no fault of the source, but should have been, the NDEE will reopen and modify the operating
permit for cause in accordance with Title 129, Chapter 15, Section 006.
>021
Air Quality Operating
Permit Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.1
-------
Hi 6KV\SkA
>v »K\,|K.si KN M" (N,!!, i
Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.3: Facility/Process Changes
SOURCE NAME:
DATE:
NDEE FACILITY ID#:
Complete the table below for any changes to the source and/or processes.
Examples of minimum details to provide are provided below:
Maximum Capacity/Throughput in Units (MMBtu/hr, lb/hr, ton/hr, hp, number of cylinders, etc.)
For Boilers: Make, Model, Model Year, Installed Date, Maximum Rated Capacity, Fuel Combusted
For Compressor Engines/Generators: Make, Model Year, Maximum Rated Capacity, Fuel Combusted, L/Cylinder
For Baghouses: Grain loading and Air flow rate
Provide an updated site diagram (Step 59) and process flow diagrams (Step 60) to reflect the listed changes.
Emissio
n Unit
ID
Emission Unit
ID/Description
Control Equipment
ID/Description
Type of
Change
(Added/
Removed/
Modified)
Maximum
Capacity/
Throughpu
t
(in Units)
Description of Change
Date of
Change
03/2021 Air Quality Operating Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.3
-------
Hi 6KV\SkA
>v »K\,|K.si KN M" (N,!!, i
Air Quality Operating Renewal Permit Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.4: New or Changed Requirements
SOURCE NAME:
DATE:
NDEE FACILITY ID#:
Complete the following table for any changes since the issuance of the existing operating permit that are subject to NSPS/NESHAP,
compliance plan changes and for changes proposed for activities in existing operating permit. If a unit is subject to a Compliance Assurance
Monitoring (CAM), the CAM must be submitted with the application.
Emission
Unit ID
(Existing,
New
and/or
Modified
Citation
New or
Changed
Applicable
Requirement
(NSPS,
NESHAP, Title
129)
Type of Change
(Added/Remove
d/Modified)
Compliance
Status
Compliance Demonstration
(Monitoring/Recordkeeping/Reporting
and/or Performance Testing)
Certification
Reporting
Schedule
Subject
to the
CAM
Rule?
03/2021
Air Quality Operating Renewal Application
Form 8.0, Section 1.3
-------
ATTACHMENT B
-------
Attachment B, OP Application Tracker Example
R2-031
R2-034
S1-036
R2-040
Ml-042
Rl-043
Ml -044
Rl-045
R2-046
R2-047
Ml-050
2R2-001
22R1-002
22R1-005
22AR-006
22R1-007
22R1-008
22AR-009
22R1-01
22M2-016
22M1-017
22AR-018
22R2-020
22R2-021
ira East LLC
Nebraska
Energy,LLC)
033-560-010151
033-561-008527
005-566-001657
033-560-004504
033-560-008471
033-560-008241
033-560-008241
033-560-008411
Administratively
Inconplete (source
notified)
Administrative
Cotrplete (sent for
rewew^
Tech
Conplete
(Afplication
ts andWeekly Status Ljidate
d 5/28/2015: Tlieso
id/2012 and 1/31/2013 7/29/14 Initial Draft Stage 11/12/14 Drafting
the "jointventures "pernits tobeputonhold. They requested that
At the moment, they arewoiking on Cargill Com Milling When that
6/1/2015 CPapphcation 15-018received 12/15/2016 CP16-046
rent 10/15/2020 InfomBtion request sent on 9/16/2020, Recieved
rplete application on 10/14/2020
requested that the "joir
3/6/15 Source called asking on status ofapphcation The source identified this OP should bwwrciked rath Aventine
Renerablein Aurora (FD 87072) A dmmstratively complete Supplemental/revised application received 3/26/12 - starts
on page 147 of filed documents Any documents w/application# 12S1-007 should be changed to 08S1-011 8/24/2017
CP 17-037 issued to Pacific Ethanol Aurora - East 10/12/2017 Assigned to Pacific Ethanol Aurora East (Facility # 59092)
ndPacificEthanol Aurora West (Facility #87072)-starting with Aurora East's OP, Upon reviewofEast plant's CPs.tt
ethanol plants area single source with a grain elevator(was Aurora Cooperative - Facility #86801) effective Decent er
(016 due to a joint venture, sent a letterto the grain elevatorrequestinga Class I OP application (previously the elevate
asNOFR) 12/14/2017 Source's lawyer submttedlegalrequests forredeteimination of single source determnation and
;tay on submitting lnfoimation due to the request forinfoimation email fromNDEQ, waiting fbrNDEQ's legal division ti
continue workonpermt 4/6/2018 declaratoiy order signed 4/13/2018 email sentto source to submtted previously
requested infbimation by 5/16/2018 5/4/2018 Updating standardlanguage and format ofdocuments ONHOLD
12/14/2017 to current (472 days through 3/31/2019) PENDING LEGAL ACTION ON HOLD, THIS
SOURCE IS NOT IN OPERATION
3/6/2015 Source calledasking onstatus ofapplication Heide
(Facility #59052) 7/3/2017 CP application 17-034 received(fecili
application 17-034 assigned to Andy 8/24/2017 CP17-037 issue
o Pacific Ethanol Aurora East (Facility #59092) and Pacific Etha
East's OP, Uponi
ltified
his OP should be woiked with Nebraste Energy
was Pacific Ethanol Aurora West) 7/17/2017 CP
lfic Ethanol Aurora - East 10/12/2017 Assi
ora West (Facility #87072) - starting rath A
«- Facility#
) effective Deci
a Class I OPapphcation (previously the e
errail fromNDEQ, waiting for NDEQ's legal di
st for inform
t 4/13/2018 er
in by 5/16/2018 5/4/2018 Updating standardlanguage and format of
documents ON HOLD: 12/14/2017 to current £582 dajs through 12/31/201S). PENDING
LEGAL ACTION Legal Action complete - waiting on CP Source to
submit updated OP application on or berfore Februaiy 4, 2922; 5/10/2022 - Project
still on hold - Source coming in on May 24th for meeting and will be submitting a
construction permit application for major reconstruction of facility.
m 01/17/2022
1/5/2022 ONHOLD: Waiting forCP to
4/5/2022: ON HOLD, This apphcat
m 08/04/2022, 5/1
/2022 - ONHOLD Sumbitti
Reviwer
and Date
-------
ATTACHMENT C
Page 1 of 3
-------
NEBRASKA
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
This guidance document is ach'isoty in nature but is binding on an agency' until amended by stick agency. A guidance document doesnot include
internal procedural documents that only affect the internal operations of the agency and does not impose additional requirements or penalties on
regulated parties or include confidential infonnation or rules and regulations made in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act. If you
belie\>e that this guidance document imposes additional requirements or penalties on regulated parties, you may request a review of the document.
05-172 March, 2020
Certification of Compliance and Deviation Reports
Facilities with Nebraska air quality operating permits and those covered by a permit-by-rule are required to submit
an annual Certificate of Compliance in accordance with Title 129 - Nebraska Air Quality Regulations, Chapter 8.
Additionally, Title V (Class I) and some Class II facilities are required tosubmit deviation reports. This guidance
document is intended to explain those reporting requirements and provide reporting examples. It is recommended
that you thoroughly read your permit to assure compliance with all reporting requirements specific to your
facility.
Certification of Compliance Reports
The Certification of Compliance is due on March 31st of each year and covers the reporting period of the
previous calendar year, January through December. Title V (Class I) facilities must submit the report to the
Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (NDEE) and to the Environmental Protection Agency's
Region VII Office. Class II facilities only need to submit the Certification to NDEE.
The Certification is your assessment, signed by your facility's responsible official, as to whether your facility
complied with the terms and conditions of your operating permit. The Certification should includethe following
information:
1) Facility information:
a) The facility name and address;
b) The facility phone number;
c) The facility contact;
d) The facility ID number;
e) The date of the permit issuance; and
f) The reporting period. The initial period that you are required to certify compliance for, after you have
been issued your initial permit, is from the date the permit was issued until the endof December of
that same year. You are required to certify compliance for the entire preceding calendar year.
2) Identify the permit terms and conditions to which your facility is subject, including design provisions;work
practice elements; required operating conditions; emission limitations; and monitoring, reporting, and record
keeping requirements.
3) List the compliance status for each permit term and condition as of the date of the Certification.
Page 2 of 3
-------
4) Certify whether compliance was continuous or intermittent.
a) Any deviation from a permit condition will be considered intermittent compliance. Continuous
compliance indicates you didn't have any deviations from your permit conditions during the reporting
period. You must include information pertaining to the deviation including the nature and cause of
the deviation, the date and time of the occurrence, and the corrective action taken.
b) If a facility is utilizing an intermittent compliance monitoring and record keeping method (such as
daily or weekly baghouse checks or daily or weekly visible emission observations),they may
designate continuous compliance when each such monitoring event demonstratescompliance with the
applicable emission limitation, control measure, work practice standard,or operational restriction, and
they have no knowledge or information indicating noncompliance during the reporting period.
c) If the permit requires a facility to determine compliance with an emission limitation by the use of
compliant coatings and/or the use of record keeping and calculations (e.g., the calculation of a
daily volume-weighted average VOC content, or calculations of emissionsbased on a fuel's sulfur
content), they may designate continuous compliance when their records and calculations
accurately document and substantiate the following:
i. The use of nothing but compliant coatings, such that continuous compliance with therelevant
emission limitation is actually achieved; or
ii. The use of types and amounts of materials such that continuous compliance with therelevant
emission limitation is actually achieved.
5) Identify the compliance monitoring methods and any other material information used as a means of
determining compliance with emission limitations, control measures, work practice standards, or operational
restrictions.
A facility is also required to certify to the general conditions of the permit. Certification can be done toeach general
condition or one statement for all general conditions can be made.
You are required to consider, identify, and address any other material information that may indicate
noncompliance with one or more of the applicable requirements of the operating permit even if dataobtained
from monitoring activities required by the permit indicate compliance.
Deviation Reports
The Deviation Report for a Class I source covers the six-month reporting periods of January throughJune and
July through December. The submittal dates for the reports are:
March 31st - Report for July through December of the previous yearSeptember
30th - Report for January through June of the same year
A Deviation Report is the reporting of any deviation from any permit condition or applicable requirement.
Deviations are a departure from an indictor range or work practice established for monitoring under this part,
consistent with any averaging period specified for averaging the result of themonitoring. Additional information
regarding deviations can be found in the "Deviations" Fact Sheet located on the NDEE website at
http://dee.ne.gov/ under Air Quality Publications.
Page 3 of 3
-------
Title V (Class I) facilities are required to complete Deviation reports and submit them to NDEE. Some permits require
Class II facilities to also submit deviation reports. For Class II sources, only one deviation report is required. The
submittal date is March 31st and it covers the previous calendar year.The reporting requirement is found in the general
conditions of the operating permit. All Deviation reports require the following information:
1) Facility information:
a) The facility name and address;
b) The facility phone number;
c) The facility contact;
d) The facility ID number;
e) The date of the permit issuance; and
f) The reporting period.
2) The permit condition or applicable requirement
3) The cause of the deviation,
4) The date and time of occurrence, and
5) Details of the corrective action(s) taken.
Reporting Format
There are no required reporting forms or formats for those with Class I or Class II permits, so your facility may choose
to send in the reports using customized formats, as long as the reports contain all the required information. Each
facility is responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of their specific operating permit. Samples of reporting
formats for the Class I and Class II permits are available for download on the Certification of Compliance and
Deviation Reports web page and provideillustrations of how to complete the reports. One illustrates the certification of
compliance information.
The other illustrates a semi-annual deviation report. You can combine the deviation and certificationinformation, as
long as the requirements for each report are fulfilled.
NDEE has also developed forms for those sources covered by a permit-by-rule. Those forms are alsoavailable for
download on the Certification of Compliance and Deviation Reports web page.
If you need assistance, feel free to contact the NDEE Air Quality Division at (402) 471-2189.
Produced by: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, P.O. Box 98922, Lincoln, NE 68509-8922;phone (402)
471-2186. To view this, and other information related to our agency, visit our web site at httv://dee.ne.sov
-------
Sample Format for Illustration Purposes
Guidance Document for Annual Certification of Compliance
Class I Sources
Due March 31st
Facility Name: Facility ID #:
Facility Address: Facility Contact:
Permit Issuance Date:
This Certification of Compliance is being submitted for January 1, (Year) through December 31, (Year)
Permit Condition
Compliance Status
"C" Continuous or "I"
Intermittent
Method for Determining Compliance
I - XVII General Conditions
In Compliance
Continuous
Routine records review and report submittals
XVIII (A) Opacity from the baghouses shall be less than
20%
Out of Compliance
Intermittent
Method 9 observations are made and recorded daily
-------
Signature by a responsible official (per Title 129, Chapter 1) is required. Certifications of Compliance Reports without a responsible official signature
will be returned as incomplete.
Title V (Class 1) facilities are required to submit copies of the Certification of Compliance report to both the EPA-Region VII and the NDEQ. All other facilities only
need to submit their Certification of Compliance to NDEQ.
NDEQ
Air Quality Compliance
PO Box 98922
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
US EPA Region VII
Air Permitting and Compliance Branch
11201 Renner Blvd.
Lenexa, KS 66219
I hereby certify that based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the statements and information in this document is true, accurate, and
complete.
Signature: Date:
Name (Printed): Title:
-------
ATTACHMENT D
-------
Air Quality Permit Program
Emission Fee
Appropriations Report
Presented to
Appropriations Committee
of the Legislature
By the
Department of Environment and Energy
NEBRASKA
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
December 22, 2021
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
INTRODUCTION 3
EMERGING ISSUES 3
A. National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Cross-State Pollution 3
B. Affordable Clean Energy Rule 4
C. Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Plan 4
D. Regional Haze 5
DEFINITIONS 6
DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS - SFY2021 7
A. Fees Assessed 7
Table 1: Fees Collected 7
B. General Discussion of Program Costs 7
Table 2: Title V Budgeted Costs for SFY2021 7
PRIMARY ACTIVITY COSTS 8
A. Payroll and Financial Center System 8
B. Costs by Primary Activity 9
Table 3: Costs by Primary Activity SFY2021 9
C. Costs Specific to Class I Major Sources 10
Table 4: Costs by Class I Major Source SFY2021 10
D. Sector-Specific Costs 14
Chart 1: Title V Costs by Sector (Percentage) 14
"}
-------
Introduction
The Department of Environment and Energy submits this report to the members of the Appropriations
Committee of the Nebraska Legislature, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §81-1505.04, as amended. This
report details all direct and indirect program costs incurred during the State Fiscal Year 2021 (SFY 2021)
in carrying out the air quality permit program. The permit program is the result of the Federal Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and the passage of LB 1257 (1992) by the Nebraska Legislature. The
department is required to establish and implement a comprehensive operating permit program for major
sources of certain air pollutants. The federal program is referred to as the Title V program. The State of
Nebraska's "Title V program" is often referred to as the Class I program.
Pursuant to the provisions of §81-1505.04, the department is required to collect an annual fee on the
emissions from major sources of air pollution in an amount sufficient to cover the costs of the
implementation of the permit program. The statute provides flexibility to develop and adjust the fee
according to federal regulation or "as required to pay all reasonable direct and indirect costs of developing
and administering the air quality permit program." The State's Payroll and Financial Center system is
utilized to document time and resources spent on the program. The purpose of this report is to document
the revenue generated from emission fees and identify costs associated with the program. In addition, as
required by statute, this report identifies the costs incurred by the department to administer the program
for each major source and each primary activity not specific to a major source. This report verifies that
revenue generated from emission fees was used by NDEE solely to offset appropriate and reasonable
costs associated with the air quality permit program.
Emerging Issues
A. National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Cross-State Pollution
Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, EPA must review the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
every five years. The purpose of these standards is to protect public health, welfare and the environment.
Pollutants regulated by these standards include ozone (O3), lead (Pb), particulate matter (PM), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulfur dioxide (SO2); Nebraska is currently comply with all
six standards. Pending actions affecting Nebraska include:
2010 S02 NAAQS
The 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) standard requires states to demonstrate attainment in the areas surrounding
large sources of this pollutant. EPA finalized the Data Requirements Rule (DRR) in 2015 to assist in
implementation of the 2010 standard, requiring state air agencies to characterize the air quality near
sources that emit 2,000 tons per year or more of SO2 Nebraska chose to comply with this requirement
using both air quality monitoring and pollutant dispersion modeling. Five sources in Nebraska were
subject to this rule; three sources relied on modeling and two opted to conduct monitoring to meet the
requirements.
NDEE submitted Nebraska's designation recommendations to EPA for the areas surrounding three major
sources to EPA in September 2015. EPA designated two of these sources (Gerald Gentleman Station in
Lincoln County, and Nebraska City Station in Otoe County) as in compliance with the standards on
September 16, 2016. The third (Sheldon Station in Lancaster County) was designated as in compliance
with the standards on August 16, 2021. The area surrounding North Omaha Station (Douglas County) was
designated as in compliance with the standards on April 30, 2021.
EPA conducts a comprehensive review of the NAAQS for each pollutant every five years. As these
standards are continually subject to being lowered, maintaining the state's attainment status may prove to
3
-------
be a challenge. In April 2019, EPA retained the current primary (health-based) SO2 NAAQS, and the
2012 PM 2 5 NAAQS is presently under review. In the event Nebraska should be designated as not
complying with a NAAQS, the state will be required to develop a strategy to return to compliance
(typically within a timeframe of 3 to 5 years) and sustain on-going compliance thereafter. The impact of a
non-compliance designation would potentially create challenges for existing industry to expand and may
dissuade new industry from coming into the impacted parts of the state.
Because emissions from one state can sometimes cause or contribute to air pollution issues in a
downwind state, EPA issued the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address interstate transport.
Interstate transport is addressed in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) submitted by states when a new or
revised NAAQS is promulgated. At the present time, Nebraska is in compliance with this rule for all
applicable NAAQS. A SIP revision for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS was submitted to EPA in 2020 and
approved in August 2021. When this SIP was originally submitted to EPA in 2013, these elements were
addressed by reliance on a memo from former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy; this memo was
rendered void following implementation of the rule. An analysis of Nebraska sources of SO2 and their
potential for impacts on neighboring states was conducted and it was determined that emissions from
Nebraska sources don't interfere with adjacent states' ability to maintain or comply with the NAAQS.
Particulate Matter (PM25)
In April 2020, EPA proposed to retain the current NAAQS for particulate matter (PM), including both
fine particles (PM2 5) and coarse particles (PM10), issuing its final rule in December 2020 to retain the
current standards. In June 2021, EPA announced that it will reconsider the 2020 final rule based on
evidence that current standards may not be adequate; it expects to issue proposed rulemaking in the
summer of 2022.
B. Affordable Clean Energy Rule
In August 2018, EPA proposed the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule, which became final on
July 8, 2019. This rule included three separate rulemakings: 1) repeal of the Clean Power Plan; 2)
establishment of emission guidelines for states to use when developing plans to limit greenhouse gas
emissions at power plants, and 3) determination that Heat Rate Improvement is the best system for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants. There were 12 designated EGU
units inthe State of Nebraska that are subject to the ACE rule.
The Affordable Clean Energy Rule was vacated in January 2021. NDEE has put this plan on hold.
C. Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Plan
On May 21, 2021, EPA finalized the federal implementation plan for municipal solid waste landfills
(MSWL). The plan supports the following federal rule located at 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart Cf: Emission
Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. The emission guidelines apply to
landfills that were constructed prior to July 17, 2014 and accepted waste after November 8, 1987. This
new emission guideline lowers the threshold for which facilities must install gas collection and control
equipment from 50 Mg/yr to 34 Mg/yr of nonmethane organic compounds (NMOCs). NDEE is working
with EPA on implementation of the federal plan while the agency develops a state implementation plan.
-------
D. Regional Haze
Regional Haze refers to impaired visibility due to particulates and industrial gases in the atmosphere.
EPA issued the Regional Haze Rule in 1999 to improve visibility in national parks and wilderness areas.
The rule requires that state and federal agencies work together to achieve this goal. Numerous
amendments to the Rule have been issued addressing the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as an
alternative to Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for particular pollutant sources, and regulatory
requirements for state implementation plans. In addition, recent guidance and technical support
documents are available to assist states in preparing State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for the second
implementation period (2018-2028).
Nebraska submitted its Regional Haze SIP for the first implementation period (2008-2018) in July 2011;
in 2012, EPA issued a partial approval/partial disapproval of the SIP. The disapproved portions include
the BART determination for sulfur dioxide for Gerald Gentleman Station and the state's long-term
strategy for regional haze insofar as it relied on the BART determination. The disapproved portions will
be addressed in the forthcoming SIP revision. This source participates in the CSAPR trading program,
which allots each source an emissions budget for SO; and permits trading of allotments. Emissions to
date from this source have been within the allotted SO2 budget under CSAPR, and no additional control
measures have been required.
The Department submitted its Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report in April 2017. At present the
Department is developing its SIP revision for the second implementation period which was due to EPA in
July 2021. This SIP revision will address portions of the initial SIP and progress report, as well as state
obligations for the current implementation period.
Eagle Rock
5
-------
Definitions
For the purposes of this report, the following definitions have been used:
Chargeable emissions: The total tonnage of regulated pollutants emitted from a major source up to and
including any applicable caps. A cap of 4,000 tons per regulated pollutant applies to all major sources. A
cap of 400 tons per pollutant applies to mid-size electrical generation facilities that are not under
jurisdiction of a local air program and that have a nameplate capacity of between 70 and 115 megawatts.
Class I - Major Source: An air emissions source permitted to emit annually 100 tons or more of PM10,
CO, NOx, SOx, or VOC; 10 tons or more of any single HAP; 25 tons of any combination of HAPs. Until
the U.S. Supreme Court partially overturned the GHG permitting rule June 2014, a source with emissions
of 100 tons or more of greenhouse gases on a mass basis and 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents
were also considered major sources. The court ruled that EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for
purposes of determining whether a source is subject to federal permitting rules. Such sources with
emissions above the thresholds are required to obtain a Class I operating permit. Some other source
categories are required to obtain a Class I operating permit because of other federal requirements.
Class II - Synthetic Minor Source: A source that has a potential to emit to be a major source, but
through enforceable limits has lowered its potential to emit to below the major source thresholds. A
synthetic minor source must either obtain a Class II permit or qualify for the Low Emitter Program.
Synthetic minor sources are not assessed emission fees.
Compliance Assurance: Assuring compliance includes activities such as conducting facility inspections,
responding to complaints, stack test observations, file reviews, voluntary compliance, and enforcement.
Direct costs: Direct program costs are those costs incurred through the direct implementation of the Title
V program. Examples include: costs of permit writing and review labor, staff development, training,
inspector salaries and travel expenses, air monitoring equipment purchases, regulation development, small
business assistance, and computer modeling software purchases.
Indirect costs: Indirect costs are the programs share of costs incurred by the department that benefit the
entire agency. Examples include: building rent, costs of certain administrative labor such as the director,
the deputy directors, and general data management.
Low Emitter Source: A source that has a potential to emit to be a major source, but has demonstrated
through records and emission inventories for at least 5 years a history of actual emissions not exceeding
50% of major source thresholds for regulated pollutants and that is not otherwise required to obtain a
permit.
Non Source-Specific Costs: Those costs not specifically attributable to a single source. Examples
include: resources required for review of federal regulations, resources required for participation in
national organizations, small business assistance, labor for drafting a general air permit, and ambient air
monitoring in areas of multiple sources.
Primary Activity: A main functional area of the air program. Examples of primary activities include:
permitting, small business assistance, emission inventory, state regulation and program development,
compliance assurance, federal policy and rulemaking, and acid rain.
Source-Specific Costs: Those costs specifically attributable to a single source. Examples include: labor
for drafting an operating permit for a single source, labor for inspecting a single source, and cost of
publishing a public notice for a permit.
6
-------
Direct and Indirect Costs - SFY2021
A. Fees Assessed
Major source emissions were first subject to fees for calendar year 1994 emissions. The following table
details the fee rates for the last 10 years, the date those fees were due, how much was collected, and
which fiscal year the fees were intended to fund.
Table 1: Fees Collected
Emission
Inventory
Year
Fee Rate
per Ton of
Pollutant
Fee Due Date
Fees
Collected1
Fiscal Year
Funded
2011
$64
July 1, 2012
$2,640,609
SFY2013
2012
$65
July 1, 2013
$2,588,903
SFY2014
2013
$67
July 1, 2014
$2,738,257
SFY2015
2014
$70
July 1,2015
$2,832,625
SFY2016
2015
$71
July 1, 2016
$2,719,339
SFY2017
2016
$78
July 1,2017
$2,959,554
SFY2018
2017
$78
July 1,2018
$3,115,348
SFY2019
2018
$70
July 1, 2019
$2,941,109
SFY2020
2019
$65
July 1, 2020
$2,617,991
SFY2021
2020
$50
July 1, 2021
$1,876,463
SFY2022
B. General Discussion of Program Costs
The department's SFY2021 estimated expenditures (budget) was $2,962,442 forthe Title V program.
The department expended $2,165,213, or approximately 73% of the budget. Table 2 provides a summary
of SFY2021 Title V budgeted costs.
Table 2: Title V Budgeted Costs for SFY2021
(July 1, 2020 - June 30, 2021)
Category
Title V Budgeted Costs
Personnel
$ 1,628,815
Benefits
420,549
Contractual
19,000
Supplies
4,500
Other
78,501
Travel
25,500
Equipment
0
Total Direct Costs
2,176,865
Total Indirect Costs
785,577
Total Costs:
$ 2,962,442
1 Fees collected reflect late payment fees and updates to the emissions inventory that may have occurred after the initial submittal
was filed.
7
-------
Middle Loup near Tliedford
Primary Activity Costs
A. Payroll and Financial Center System
The department is required to establish a system that provides reporting of resources expended on the
primary components of the air quality program, as well as resources expended for each major source. Use
of a tracking system commenced in July 1996.
Under the Payroll and Financial Center system, program activities are either charged to the Title V (Class
I) program, the "state" program, the federal 103 program, or to the construction permit application fee
program. The emission fees paid by major sources fund the Title V program. The "state" program refers
to the 105 grant program, which is funded by federal funds and state general funds. The federal 103
program is funded wholly by federal funds and is utilized only for maintaining the PM2 s (particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 microns) ambient monitoring network. The
construction permit application fee program was enacted by the legislature during the 2004 session
(LB449) and began January 1, 2005. When applying for an air quality construction permit, the owner or
operator of the facility must submit an application fee. The fees collected under the construction permit
program are used toward paying some of the costs of processing the application. There are currently no
fees charged to sources for air quality operating pennits.
All time spent by staff on the Title V program is recorded as program activity on timesheets in the Payroll
and Financial Center system. The Title V program includes activities associated with major sources and
synthetic-minor sources. Permit, planning, and compliance program staff document time by primary
activity and by specific source or non-source specific activities. An example of how the Title V program
activities are tracked follows:
33 - 560 - 008223
t
Indicates which fund time
Indicates the primary activity
Inlndicates whether the time is for
a specific source or for a non-
is to be charged (Ex. TitleV
program)
(ex. Class I - major source
permitting)
source specific activity (ex.
F FEXcon Company, Inc.)
8
-------
Costs by Primary Activity
The following table details the Title V air program costs for SFY2021 by primary activity:
Table 3: Costs by Primary Activity SFY2021
(July 1, 2020- June 30, 2021)
Time Tracking
Code
Primary Activity
Agency Program
Costs
001; 115; 119; 120;
121; 123; 124;128;
130; 607
Administration/Management
$ 130,584
002
General Office
139,865
100
Outside Meeting
4,286
103; 111; 567; 568;
592
Compliance / Complaints / Enforcement
460,159
106;554; 608
Environmental Data Collection/ Ambient Air
Monitoring
18,928
112;555;564; 565;
604;113
Rules & Regulations / Legislation
114,022
114;606
Training
143,340
116;122
Process Improvement / Application
Development
38,350
125
Legal Advice
0
170
Hazards (Floods)
0
553;594;605
Air Emission Inventory
97,818
559;600
Small Business Assistance / Title V/Class II -
Compliance Assistance/Outreach
45,451
566; 590; 101
Construction Permit
276,240
591; 560; 561; 562;
570
Operating Permit
415,419
593;603
Modeling
39,304
596
Monitoring Mercury
8,769
601
Air 105/Title V - Compliance Office Activities
74,937
602
Air 105/Title V - Planning Office
21,155
610
Air 105/Title V - Construction Permit Office
52,788
611
Air 105/Title V - Operating Permit Office
67,549
612
Air 105/Title V - NO FID/Permit
16,249
TOTAL
$ 2,165,213
-------
C. Costs Specific to Class I Major Sources
Table 4 contains the costs the agency incurred that were specific to individual Class I major sources.
Table 4: Costs by Class I Major Source SFY2021
(July 1, 2020 - June 30, 2021)
Facility Name
Facility
Location
Facility
ID
Time
Tracking
Code
Total
Agency
Costs
A-l Fiberglass
Hastings
723
008366
$ 5,823.39
A-l Fiberglass
Aurora
85312
008917
1,309.23
ADM Corn Processing
Columbus
39285
008206
33,358.80
AGP Soy Processing
Hastings
72698
008794
33,032.55
Archer Daniels Midland Co
Fremont
9169
008265
4,180.23
Ash Grove Cement Co
Louisville
4129
004504
21,163.08
BD Medical Systems
Columbus
38719
008383
784.52
Bertrand Compressor Station
Loomis
88547
010189
1,740.07
Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc
Bellevue
59056
008471
517.30
Burgess Well Company
Minden
27639
007332
2,068.55
Butler County Landfill, Inc
David City
62743
008812
3,389.31
C.W. Burdick Gen. Station
Grand Island
54712
008429
510.75
Cargill Ag Horizons
Albion
1446
008310
249.67
Cargill Inc Polyol Sweeteners
Blair
64401
008787
16,444.45
Cargill Lactic Acid Plant
Blair
91164
010294
19,930.37
Cargill, Inc
Blair
57902
008296
165,897.90
Chief Ethanol Fuels, Inc
Hastings
58049
008315
16,673.54
City of Wayne
Wayne
47263
008426
453.16
Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc
Kimball
58562
008319
17,979.15
CNH Industrial America, LLC
Grand Island
24371
008395
7,716.89
David City Municipal Power
David City
4016
008300
442.55
Douglas County Recycling Landfill
Bennington
62593
008467
7,907.51
Douglas County Landfill
Omaha
59516
008244
11,714.50
Dutton-Lainson Co
Hastings
125
008374
2,744.52
E Energy Adams LLC
Adams
86373
010021
27,155.25
10
-------
Facility Name
Facility
Location
Facility
ID
Time
Tracking
Code
Total
Agency
Costs
Eaton Corporation
Kearney
2374
008545
$23,243.70
Endicott Clay Products
Endicott
27355
008389
952.64
Enron Natural Gas
Palmyra
37514
008325
11,314.14
Excel Corp
Schuyler
6272
008524
11,941.74
FLEXcon Company, Inc
Columbus
58429
008223
10,824.27
Flint Hills Resources Fairmont
Fairmont
86026
010000
31,714.36
G & P Development, Inc Landfill
Milford
45275
008825
2,695.04
Goodyear Tire
Norfolk
53867
008391
5,560.64
Grand Island Burdick Station
Grand Island
54712
2,617.32
Grand Island Platte Gen Station
Grand Island
58027
6,856.75
Grand Island Regional Landfill
Shelton
62812
008809
2,225.24
Green Plains Atkinson, LLC
Atkinson
86416
010027
1,523.39
Green Plains Central City, LLC
Central City
82836
009032
13,478.19
Green Plains Ord, LLC
Ord
85861
009091
9,225.41
Green Plains Wood River, LLC
Wood River
86000
009094
28,968.08
Green Plains
York
59094
008291
8,673.02
Hastings Utility - Don Henry
Hastings
58345
008530
9,011.88
Hastings Utility - N. Denver
Hastings
55721
008339
4,320.13
Hastings Utility - Whelan Energy
Hastings
58048
008338
17,698.66
Huntsman
Sidney
5456
008392
1,666.78
IBP
Lexington
8744
008432
8688.63
J Bar J Landfill
Ogallala
63354
008826
3472.19
KAAPA Ethanol
Ravenna
77854
009013
30,511.38
KANEB Pipeline
Geneva
22282
008343
22,262.64
KANEB Pipeline
Columbus
39527
008345
7,004.22
KANEB Pipeline
Osceola
58738
008482
6,756.28
KN Energy
Lexington
8669
008437
5325.27
KN Int. Gas
Albion
1416
008475
184.70
KN Int. Gas
Holdrege
38270
008476
537.71
11
-------
Facility Name
Facility
Location
Facility
ID
Time
Tracking
Code
Total
Agency
Costs
KN Int. Gas
North Platte
58735
008477
$ 10,625.77
KN Int. Gas
Grand Island
24673
008479
145.58
Koch Fertilizer Beatrice, LLC
Beatrice
23383
008411
18,973.11
Lon D Wright Power Plant
Fremont
48518
008350
6,809.27
Lincoln Premium Poultry
Fremont
002500
27,926.33
Natural Gas
Beatrice
23034
008435
1,053.29
Natural Gas
Otoe
37669
008470
12,932.60
Naturally Recycled Proteins
Wakefield
80265
009061
7,419.74
NatureWorks, LLC
Blair
69585
008857
2,332.68
Nebraska City Power Plant # 1
Nebraska City
37388
008353
93.21
Nebraska City Power Plant # 3
Nebraska City
64753
009004
9,397.98
Nebraska Energy
Aurora
59052
008424
157.37
NNSWC Landfill
Clarkson
62779
008811
3,119.61
Northern Natural Gas Co
Beatrice
23382
008324
7,814.90
NPPD Beatrice Power Station
Beatrice
76739
009002
15,019.55
NPPD Canaday Station
Lexington
8512
008433
103.63
NPPD Gerald Gentleman Station
Sutherland
34385
008396
4,448.93
NPPD Hebron Peaking Unit
Hebron
58034
008708
2,902.18
NPPD McCook Peaking Unit
McCook
39986
008836
2,649.13
NPPD Gerald Gentleman Station
Sutherland
000098
17,588.70
Nucor Corporation
Norfolk
35548
008406
1,053.31
Nucor Steel
Norfolk
35677
008267
14,974.06
OPPD Cass County Station
Plattsmouth
70919
008870
2,242.81
OPPD Nebraska City Station
Nebraska City
58343
008355
29,902.34
OPPD Sarpy County Station
Bellevue
42638
008241
1,570.34
Pacific Ethanol Aurora West
Aurora
87072
010151
22,283.88
Papillion CRK-WWTP
Omaha
57789
008436
1,639.58
PGLA-1
Blair
64258
008451
17,852.84
Pioneer Trails Tank Car
86000
001955
633.68
12
-------
Facility Name
Facility
Location
Facility
ID
Time
Tracking
Code
Total
Agency
Costs
Plainview Municipal Power Plant
Plainview
38561
008757
$ 44.56
Platte Generating Station
Grand Island
58027
008771
799.91
Premier Ind.
Mead
43396
008221
2,840.39
Raven Northbrook, LLC
Springfield
010529
37,778.54
Sarpy County Sanitary Landfill
Springfield
48856
008828
4,330.12
Siouxland Ethanol
Jackson
85434
007303
5,289.67
TIGT Big Springs Station
Big Springs
56628
008297
7,876.12
Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc
Dakota City
7339
008376
12,714.41
Union Pacific Railroad
North Platte
60192
008481
12,454.19
Valero Renewable Fuels Co
Albion
85814
009089
7,093.32
Vulcraft/Nucor
Norfolk
35548
008406
717.15
Western Sugar Cooperative
Scottsbluff
44141
008225
45,216.12
Williams Power & Light
Irvington
17738
008462
4,404.73
13
-------
D. Sector-Specific Costs
Chart 1 illustrates the program costs by industry sector. The heavy manufacturing sector includes manufacturing
facilities such as Nucor Steel, Ash Grove, and FLEXcon. The food and meat processing sector includes bread
manufacturing, meat packing, rendering, and pet food manufacturing. Incinerationincludes hospital waste incinerators,
as well as the Clean Harbors facility in Kimball. Wastewater treatment facilities (WWTFs) include those systems at
municipalities. The "non-source specific" category refers to costs associated with activities that are not related to an
individual source, but benefit a broad category of sources. Examples of "non-source specific" activities include, but are
not limited to: Grow Nebraska Team activities, ambient monitoring, rule development, process improvement activities,
outreach, training, and operating expenses. The program costs reflected in Chart 1 include those attributed to source-
specific activities related to specific sectors. The sector with the largest program coststo NDEE during SFY2021 was the
Grain, Ethanol & Value-Added Agriculture Sector at 44.54%. Of this, $165,898 was attributed to one source, Cargill in
Blair.
Chart 1: Title V Costs by Sector (Percentage)
Electric Generation
14.47%
Rail, Pipeline & Gas
Transmission, 8.26%
Food & Meat
Processing, 5.82%
Grain, Ethanol & Value
Added Agriculture,
44.54%
Construction & Paving,
0.26%
Non-Source Specific Activities, 6.56%
-------
ATTACHMENT E
15
-------
Nebraska Department of
Environment and Energy
MEMORANDUM
To: Jim Macy, Director
Through: Kara Valentine, Deputy Director
From: Brad Pracheil, Inspection and Compliance Division Administrator
Date: May 4, 2022
RE: 2021 Emission Fee Rate Assessment
Attached, please find the fee rate assessment for the 2021 emission inventory. Pursuant to
§81-1505.04, emission fees are collected and used to fund the implementation of the air quality
permit program since 1994. Sources report their annual actual emissions by March 31st for the
previous calendar year. This information is then used to determine the appropriate fee rate. Fees
assessed on the 2021 emission inventory fund state fiscal year 2023 (SFY23) which begins July
1, 2022.
The rate calculated for SFY23, based on the 2021 El, is $50 per ton of pollutant. The rate
for SFY22 (the current year) was also $50 per ton. The chargeable emissions increased by
1,205 tons from the previous year's emissions inventory and we have minimized the fee rate by
applying an excess of $1,781,881 in surplus funds from SFY22 toward SFY23 (Table 1).
Appendix 1 includes a table detailing the chargeable emission levels from 2016 to 2021.
The projected fee for the 2022 emission inventory is estimated to range from $73 to $78
per ton. The Department projects the future year fee rate so fee payers may plan their budgets
accordingly. Adjustments (up or down) to the actual fee rate may occur as a result of budget
changes, program changes, surplus availability, and the amount of reported chargeable
em lsslons.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Invoices are expected to be
sent out June 1, 2022. Thank you.
CC: Ryan Phillips
Kevin Stoner
Air Division Supervisors
16
-------
2021 Fee Memo
17
-------
5/4/2022
FEE ASSESSMENT FOR 2021 EMISSION INVENTORY
This document is the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy 2021 emission
inventory fee assessment for the Class I program. The fee rate for the 2021 emission inventory is $50
per ton. The fees collected based on the 2021 emission inventory will be used to fund StateFiscal
Year 2023 (SFY23), which runs July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. The following tabledetails a
history of the emission fees collected and the amount of chargeable emissions emitted since 2004.
State Fiscal
Emission
Chargeable
Fee Rate
Total Fees
Estimated
Year
Reporting
Emissions 1
($ per
Coll ected 2
Budget
Calendar
(tons per
ton)
Amount
Year
year)
2006
2004
42.942
$38
$1,634,451
$1,937,144
2007
2005
41,908
$51
$2,136,050
$1,997,943
2008
2006
42,489
$57
$2,410,594
$2,178,170
2009
2007
40,812
$57
$2,326,284
$2,479,887
2010
2008
39,982
$62
$2,478,420
$2,594,101
2011
2009
38,093
$70
$2,666,552
$2,685,567
2012
2010
38,890
$66
$2,566,717
$2,876,672
2013
2011
41,260
$ 64
$2,640,609
$2,810,237
2014
2012
40,728
$65
$2,588,903
$2,916,219
2015
2013
40,192
$67
$2,738,257
$2,968,018
2016
2014
40,606
$70
$2,832,625
$3,073,423
2017
2015
38,965
$71
$2,719,339
$3,204,509
2018
2016
38,036
$78
$2,959,554
$3,352,468
L019
2011
JIT,201
$78
$3,1T5,348
$3,425,769
2020
2018
41,748
$70
$2,941,109
$3,912,401
2021
2019
39,840
$65
$2,617,991
$2,962,442
2022
2020
37,521
$50
$1,879,781
$3,712,442
2023
2021
38,726
$50
TBD
These fees collected from major sources are used to implement Nebraska's Class I program.
Statute requires that emission fees can only be used for purposes of the direct andindirect costs
associated with the Class I permit program (Neb. Rev. Stat. 81-1505.05).
There are two mechanisms by which the Department may set the emission fee rate. First,
it may be adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price Index (CPI): Second the Department has the
flexibility to establish the emission fee "as required to pay all reasonable direct and
1 When -inventories are not-submitted by March 31 the NDEE does not have an accurate account of the chargeable emissions for
the previous calendar year. NDEE assumes the emissions remained level from the previous year.
2 Total fees collected reflect late payment fees and updates to the emissions inventory that may have occurred after the initial
submittal was filed. TBD - To be determined after payment have been made.
2021 Fee Memo
2
-------
5/4/2022
indirect costs of developing and administering the air quality permit program," Neb. Rev. Stat.81 -
1505.04 (Cum. Supp. 1992). The latter is the mechanism the Department is using.
Regulated chargeable emissions (particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns
(PM10), oxides of sulfur (S02), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), lead,
and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs)) emitted fluctuate year to year. In previous years while
calculating the fee rate, the Department would forecast what the chargeable emissions were expected
to be prior to receiving emission inventories from sources. The Department provided sources with the
fee rate based upon a rough estimate of the chargeable emissions; they completed their emission
inventories and submitted their fees with the inventories accordingly. During this practice, the
Department would sometimes see a significantdifference between the forecasted and actual
chargeable emissions numbers. Differences can result in collecting either insufficient funds or excess
funds depending upon whether the actual chargeable emissions total was higher or lower than the
forecast. Several years ago, the Department changed the system in order to obtain and use a more
accurate estimate of the chargeable emissions. We collect the emission inventory reports first, use
this information to determine the fee rate, and finally invoice the source for the emission fee.
Additionally, each year, the Department conducts emission inventory audits on a sampling of sources
to ensure that the reported emissions are complete, accurate, and reflect actual emissions for the year.
If warranted, sources will be asked to update their inventories and remit additional emission fees or
the Department will refund overpayments as appropriate.
There are two key factors that affect the fee rate: program costs (budget) and estimated
chargeable emissions. The projected program costs (budget) and the assumptions used are detailed in
Table 1. The next two pages detail the calculations which derive the 2021 emission fee rate and
estimate the 2022 fee rate. The Department provides an estimate of the 2022 fee ratefor planning
purposes only. The 2022 rate could change depending upon the amount of chargeable emissions,
budget needs, and the availability of surplus funds to be applied to the next fiscal year.
Table 1: Title V Program Budget Request for State Fiscal Year 2023
Item
Amount
Description
Personnel
$ 1,980,525
Personnel cost - Salaries and benefits for 26 FTEs
Indirect
$854,417
Indirect costs
Other Expenses
$877,500
This includes operational costs such as process improvement projects,
data processing expenses, office supplies, postal services, computer
leases, publication, travel, training, membership dues, and capital
outlay.
Total:
$3,712,442
Appendix 1 lists the total chargeable emission tonnages per source. Facilities within the jurisdiction ofthe
local air agencies (Lincoln Lancaster Health Department and Omaha Air Quality Control) are
inventoried and assessed emission fees determined by these local programs. Sources within the local
control regions are not included in Appendix 1.
2021 Fee Memo
3
-------
FEERA TE CALCULA TION
2021 Emission Inventory (El) Fee Rate Calculation
Expenditures throue;h March 31, 2022
$ (1,583,329)
Cash Balance as of March 31,2022
$2,645,145
Protected Expenditures for April - June 2022
$ (476,489)
Pro jected Total Expenditures for SFY 2022
$ (2,059,818)
Pro jected Interest Income for April - June 2022
$ 13.225
Projected Balance on June 30,2022
$2,181,881
Estimated Costs for SFY 2023 = $3,712,442
Minimum Operational Balance for initial SFY 2023 expenses3 = $400,000
Estimated Need for SFY 2023 = $3,712,442 - $1,781,881 = $1,930,561
Chargeable ('missions Reported on 2021 Inventory as of April 20, 2022 = 38,727 tonsMinimum
Fee Rate= $1,930,561 + 38,727 tons=$ 49.85 per ton
Fee Rate to be assessed on the 2021 Emission Inventory4 $ 50 per ton
3 The Department retains some funds in reserve in order to assure that sufficient funds are available to process
payroll and bills as emission fees are submitted. The Department is striving to have an end of the year balance of
approximately two pay period s of operational expenses .
4 The Department must ensure that sufficient fees are collected to fund the program; therefore, the calculated rate
was increased to the next whole dollar amount of $50 per ton.
2021 Fee Memo
4
-------
5/4/2022
Future Year Fee Rate Estimate-2022 Emission Inventory
Projected Cash Balance on June 30, 2022
$2,181,881
2021 Emission Inventory Fees Collected
-------
5/4/2022
Appendix 1: 2016 -2021 Chargeable Emissions by Facility in Tons per Year
DEQ #
F acility Name
2016
Tons8
2017
Tons8
2018
Tons8
2019
Tons8
2020
Tons8
2021
Tons8
125
Dutton-L ainson Co
14.19
14,83
13.46
16.87
15.56
16.05
723
A-l Fiberglass
57.65
58.69
53.02
58.74
42.36
32.19
1416
KMIGT Albion
Compressor Sta
39.2
40.74
42.13
:39.98
43.77
42.54
2374
Eaton Corp
12.68
8.76
Class II
1446
Cargill AgHorizons
11.9
8.08
12.55
_
-
-
4016
David City Plant
2.26
1.77
0.83
-
-
4129
Ash Grove Cement
Co
3,975.2
3704.22
3847.14
2963.88
2776.98
3338.21
5456
T allgrass Huntsman
Station 1
216.7
210.94
171.93
154.7
141.57
158.66
6272
Cargill Meat
Solutions Corp
127.6
132.76
128.38
107.43
95.3
103.73
7339
Tyson Fresh Meats,
Inc.
55.44
69.28
55.45
52.97
46.33
45.76
8512
NPPD Canaday
Station
4
3.45
1.48
1.57
1.78
11.95
8669
KMIGT Lexington
Compressor
61.7
76.6
148.44
120.2
129.48
88.24
8744
Tyson Fresh Meats,
Inc.
78.1
72.11
74.73
81.13
74.53
73.86
9169
Archer Daniels
Midland Co
187.4
205.73
252.76
247.74
208.92
246.2
17738
Irvington Station
52.1
54.88
58.66
51.12
47.61
55.28
22282
Geneva Terminal
117.5
119.59
136.83
105.83
120.91
168.18
23034
NGPL Compressor
Sta. No. 106
1466.6
1589.01
1862.26
1841.77
1231.71
1092.88
23151
Exmark
Manufacturing Co.
12.7
16.36
9.05
-
-
-
23382
Northern Natural
Gas Company.
659.2
589.8
1164.76
1155.42
803.99
158.36
23383
Koch Nitrogen Plant
285.6
347.59
220.86
232.3
233.23
218.86
24371
New Holland North
America Inc
37.8
40.53
40.72
33.48
32.44
42.98
24673
KMIGT Grand
Island Comp,
131.6
143.74
150.31
144.02
118.59
138.33
27086
Agrium Advanced
Technologies
closed
-
-
-
-
-
27355
Endicott Clay
Products Co
198.7
218.26
218.78
218.4
229.29
227.06
27639
Burgess Well
3.4
0
3.45
8.67
2.89
-
34385
NPPD Gerald
Gentleman Sta.
8590.6
8561.5
8588.59
8672.28
8560.2
8606.86
J5548
Nucor Corp Vulcraft
Division
34.9
39.16
41.24
96.18
89.43
55.66
35677
Nucor Steel
528.7
503.44
683.82
576.58
592.61
754.19
36751
Magnolia Metal
Corp
0.8
-
-
-
-
-
37388
Nebraska City
Power Plant No 1
1.6
7.48
3.78
11.9
-
-
2021 Fee Memo
6
-------
5/4/2022
Appendix 1: 2016 - 2021 Chargeable Emissions by Facility in Tons per Year
DEQ#
Facility Name
2016
Tons8
2017
Tons8
2018
Tons8
2019
Tons8
2020
Tons8
2021
Tons8
37514
Northern Natural
Gas Company
921.9
1086.31
1376.36
1194.78
997.51
849.91
37669
NGPL Compressor
Sta. No. 196
16.6
31.46
38.88
24.52
4.97
1.57
38270
KMIGT Holdrege
Como. Sta.
12.7
2.44
0.92
0.97
0.77
0.79
38561
Plainview Municipal
Power
1.0
0.37
0.24
-
-
-
38719
Beet on Dickinson
Medical Svs.
27.6
47.02
69.11
64.07
62.35
70.1
39285
ADM Com
Processing
1906.9
2094.23
2005.72
1945.76
1364.91
1392.61
39527
Columbus Terminal
102.7
120.43
117.97
115.65
97.64
103.32
39986
NPPD McCook
Peaking Unit
3.8
1.89
3.16
4.28
4.2
11.57
42638
OPPD Sarpy County
Station
54.9
77.96
117.19
78.14
66.53
119.94
43396
Insulfoam
153.4
152.46
129.76
153.04
134.24
171.46
44141
Western Sugar
Comoanv
177.3
842.25
679.84
690.2
719.68
803.22
45275
G&P Development
Inc. Landfill
15.5
19.38
18.05
16.27
23.65
18.85
47263
Wayne Plant
8.6
3.33
6.93
1.44
1.54
21.99
48518
Lou D Wright Power
Plant
958.5
1000.81
2174.57
1155.96
930.22
954.93
48856
Sarpy County
Sanitary Landfill
29.2
17.51
5.78
3.84
6.21
9.67
53804
Apache
Manufacturing
13.6
14.06
11.77
-
-
-
53867
Veyance
Technologies Inc.
50.5
55.35
46.9
46.71
31.71
34.45
54712
C WBurdick
Generating Station
2.0
2.65
2.82
4.35
2.32
14.92
55719
Hastings Adams
County Landfill
15.28
14.45
55721
North Denver
Station
0.8
2.05
0.99
0.97
0.89
0.22
56628
KMIGT Big Springs
Station
210.1
241.23
270.21
264.42
257.28
231.56
57789
Omaha Papillion
Creek Waste
320.3
300.35
302.95
243.22
202.56
287.6
57902
Cargill Inc
933.0
978.0
917
972.35
957.63
975.15
58027
Platte Generating
Station
845.7
714.26
1154.03
832.8
793.46
825.5
58034
NPPD Hebron
Peaking Unit
3.3
1.34
2.39
5.73
6.59
17.14
58048
Whelan Energy
Center Unit #1
866.9
869.6
817
787.99
782.98
876.31
58048
Whelan Energy
Center Unit #2
836.6
842.73
1628.11
1132.36
737.11
1059.77
58049
Chief Ethanol Fuels
Inc
392.2
495.26
496.72
542.17
376.66
480.85
2021 Fee Memo
8
-------
5/4/2022
Appendix 1; 2016 - 2021 Chargeable Emissions by Facility in Tons per Year
DEQ#
F acility Name
2016
Tons8
2017
Tons8
2018
Tons8
2019
Tons8
2020
Tons8
2021
Tons8
58343
OPPD Nebraska
City Station
8550.3
8501.91
8573.57
8434.13
8432.32
8390.53
58345
Don Henry Power
Center
0.3
0.28
0.49
1.16
0.39
4.66
58429
FLEXcon Company
Inc
31.4
31.01
29.68
21.1
19.09
21.44
58562
Clean Harbors Env
Services
469.7
466.91
433.33
431.37
424.97
420.8
58735
KMIGT North Platte
Compressor
16.1
21.11
71.03
45.04
59.86
24.74
58738
Osceola Terminal
2.4
2.43
2.41
2.34
1.85
2.53
59052
Nebraska Energy
LLC
160.1
162.61
153.03
0.53
0
-
59056
Earthgrains Baking
Company
25.4
31.5
30.71
28.48
25.01
59094
Abengoa Bioenergy
87.0
111.19
91.22
108.63
110.13
112.84
59516
Douglas County
Landfill
0.5
1.35
0.18
0.51
0.66
0.55
60192
Union Pacific
Railroad
55.1
66.44
57.75
42.08
53.73
77.9
62593
Douglas Co
Recycling Landfill
323.2
320.04
328.48
348.03
350.23
342.24
62743
Butler County
Landfill
38.1
70.03
87.33
46.5
32.64
49.76
62744
LP Gill Inc Landfill
21.49
21.17
62779
NNSWC Landfill
14.7
10.33
10.69
12.83
12.01
12.24
62812
Grand Island
Regional Landfill
19.3
20.67
24.78
28.28
29.94
27.52
63354
J Bar J Landfill
6.5
6.45
6.63
6.83
7.17
7.15
64258
PURAC Production
USA
6.1
6.02
-
-
-
-
64401
Cargill Polyols, LLC
24.0
19.38
17.43
15.53
14.63
16.1
64753
Nebraska City
Power Plant No 3
0.1
0.44
0.16
1.89
0.82
1.0
69585
Nature Works LLC
39.9
52.56
52.87
52.48
55.56
53.63
70919
OPPD Cass County
Station
11.4
7.35
45.56
78.58
60.61
79.16
72698
Ag Processing - Soy
Bean Plant
527.6
740.13
715.99
691.14
761.4
1018.87
73356
Husker Ag LLC
200.77
221.6
75073
KAAPA Ethanol
201.72
231.38
76680
Lincoln Premium
Poultry LLC
286.34
362.64
76739
NPPD Beatrice
Power Station
22.9
24.88
36.44
45.93
56.91
44.81
77755
Cornhusker Energy
Lexington
64.3
-
-
-
-
-
77854
Abengoa Bioenergy
of Nebraska
152.0
143.05
247.27
236.62
331.97
313.08
80265
Naturally Recycled
Proteins, LLC
15.0
36.31
-
28.89
31.83
12.98
2021 Fee Memo
8
-------
Appendix 1; 2016 - 2021 Chargeable Emissions by Facility in Tons per Year
DEQ#
Facility Name
2016
Tons8
2017
Tons
8
2018
Tons8
2019
Tons8
2020
Tons8
2021
Tons8
82836
Green Plains Central
City LLC
205.6
242.08
187.56
191.68
173.18
174.25
85312
A1 Fiberglass
.
10.26
11.77
14.87
14.16
10.59
85434
Siouxland Ethanol
LLC
-
-
161.55
159.44
152.19
238.62
85814
Valero Renewable
Fuels Company
182.8
172.95
187.72
187.41
198.11
216.24
85861
Green Plains Ord.
LLC
148.1
157.35
160.91
144.7
128.61
150.9
86000
Green Plains Wood
River, LLC
174.6
187.71
207.08
201.49
212.11
213.61
86026
Flint Hills Resources
258.3
223.93
257.91
268.48
292.75
293.42
86373
E Energy Adams
LLC
261.78
232.0
258.5
86416
Green Plains
Atkinson LLC
96.1
103.79
78.24
74.17
62.87
84.75
86963
Steele City
Compressor Station
49.7
-
-
-
-
-
87072
Aventinc Aurora
West LLC
178.7
170.17
158.5
139.12
128.92
127.42
88547
Bertrand
Compressor Station
232.0
233.59
281.76
160.46
83.66
12.24
91164
Cargill Lactic Acid
Plant
28.8
35.77
37.16
39.92
33.7
37.39
106518
Fireball
1.5
108432
Raven Nortlibrook
LLC-
12.76
Totals
38,036.5
39,237.25
42038.37
39,840.25
37,523.44
38,727.39
8 A blank indicates the source was not a major source for that specific
calendar year.
-------
ATTACHMENT D: Fee Attachment
Attachment C from the March 27, 2018 Guidance
Program and Fee Evaluation Strategy and Guidance for 40 CFR Part 70
[ see the attached copy ]
-------
ATTACHMENT C
Example Annual Financial Data Form for 40 CFR Part 70
Permitting Authority' Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and the passage of LB1257 (1992) by the Nebraska Legislature
Annual Period: 07 f 01 / 2020 to o6 / 30 / 2021 (MM/DD/YYYY)
Annual Program Revenue
A
Total Program Revenue (Fees Paid by Part 70 Sources)
$ 2,526,339.92
Annual Presumptive Minimum Cost Calculation
B
Total Emissions of "Regulated Pollutants (for presumptive fee
calculation)"
37,521 tons ;
C
Presumptive Minimum Fee Rate During Period ($/ton)
$ 52.79 per ton
D
Total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Cost Adjustments (as applicable)
$
E = (B*C)+D
Presumptive Minimum Cost for the Program
$ 1,980,733.59
A < E or
A > E
Compare Total Program Revenue to Presumptive Minimum Cost
Enter: "Less Than" or "'Greater Than" or "Equal To"
Greater Than
i Annual Program Costs
F
Direct Labor Costs'
$ 1,565,053.45
G
Other Direct Costs2
$ 113,875.75
H = F+G
Total Direct Costs
$ 1,678,929.20
I
Known Indirect Costs3
$ 486,283.89
J = K*L
Calculated Indirect Costs4
$
K
Indirect Rate
%
L
Total Cost Base for the Part 70 Program
$
M = I or J
Total Indirect Costs
$ 486,283.89
N = H+M
Total Program Costs
$ 2,165,213.09
O
ll
>
Annual Operating Result
(Report deficits in parent fwses)
5 361,126.83
1 This is the sum of all direct labor costs, including regular payroll, overtime payroll, leave, fringe, and any other
administrative surcharges.
2 This is the sum of all other direct costs, including travel, materials, equipment, contractor, and any other costs directly
allocable to the part 70 program.
3 Indirect Costs may either be known or calculated. If known, enter on this row; if calculated, skip to the next three rows.
4 If Indirect Costs are calculated, enter the result here, and enter the rate and base below. Accounting or budgeting personnel
may be able to provide additional information on or assistance with calculating Indirect Costs.
1
-------
i Program Balance of Accounts (Report deficits in parentheses)
P
Beginning of Year Balance5
% 3,325,903.27
Q = 0
Annual Operating Result
$ 361,126.83
R
Fee Revenue Transferred In (describe in comments)
$
S
Non-Exchange Revenue Transferred In (describe in
comments)a- Informational Only
$
T
Fee Revenues Transferred Out (describe in comments)
$( )
U = O+Q+R-T
End of Year Balance
$ 3,687,030.10
COMMENTS:
Use this section to describe any changes in accounting methods or program elements that
affect the fee program, categories of revenue or expenses that do not fit into any of the listed
categories or apply across multiple categories, transfers in or out, or any unusual activities or
circumstances relevant to fees administration. Attach additional pages if needed.
5 This is the prior year's "End of Year Balance."
2
-------
ATTACHMENT E: Entrance Meeting Attendees June 8, 2022
Dana Skelley
Jim Macy [NDEE]
Steve Goans [NDEE]
Amy Algoe-Eakin
Shelley Schneider [NDEE]
Kevin Stoner [NDEE}
Ryan Phillips [NDEE]
Ward Burns
David Christensen [NDEE]
Pati West [NDEE]
Pat Scott
David Peter
Keith .Johnson
Bob Webber
Kathy Finazzo
173
-------
ATTACHMENT F: File Review Exit Meeting Attendees August 10, 2022
Steve Goans [NDEE]
Amy Algoe-Eakin
Shelley Schneider [NDEE]
Kevin Stoner [NDEE}
Ryan Phillips [NDEE]
Ward Burns
David Christensen [NDEE]
Pati West [NDEE]
Pat Scott
Keith .Johnson
Bob Cheever
Bob Webber
174
-------
ATTACHMENT G: NDEE's Response Letter Regarding the Draft Report
The EPA did not receive any comments from NDEE regarding the draft program review report.
175
------- |