Environmental Impact
The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions
The Department proposes administrative rules to establish reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions and compliance testing criteria for industrial wastewater collection and treatment (IWCT) operations from major VOC sources in Wisconsin ozone nonattainment areas.
Summary
Fiscal impact on local government
The proposed IWCT VOC control rule would apply only to companies that process their own industrial wastewater – rather than direct the waste stream to the local municipal wastewater treatment plants, which are already subject to DNR VOC emissions controls. Since municipal wastewater treatment plants are explicitly not involved with any independent IWCT operations which could potentially be regulated for VOCs, there would be no local government costs associated with any IWCT VOC RACT rules.
Fiscal impact on state government and private
In 2007 the Department's investigation of potential VOC RACT sources yielded no facilities that would be subject to a proposed IWCT VOC RACT rule (page 39 of the Department's June, 2007 report “Revisions to the State Implementation Plan for 8-Hour Ozone"). Consequently, the Department stated that "no major industrial wastewater facilities exist in the seven moderate nonattainment counties."
However, EPA, citing that the DNR does not independently determine VOC emissions from wastewater - rejected DNR's negative declaration on facilities subject to IWCT VOC RACT. The State must correct all ozone SIP deficiencies (including adopt an IWCT VOC RACT rule) in order to avoid sanctions.
Since the Department is not able to identify any IWCT facilities in Wisconsin being subject to a VOC RACT rule, it appears that there are negligible costs to the governmental and private industries. However, if controls are necessary for any IWCT, they would largely be designed to reduce VOC emissions by restricting the waste stream's exposure to ambient air. This is accomplished by installing water seals at those process points (drains, junction boxes, manholes, etc..) where the waste stream is exposed to the ambient air. According to a report on industrial wastewater, there would be a cost (amortized over 10 years) between $1900 and $4300 per ton VOC reduction to install these control devices.
State fiscal effect
None
Local government fiscal effect
None
Long-range fiscal implications
None
Agency Contact Person
Bill Adamski
Wisconsin DNR
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
(608) 266-2660
Notice of Hearing
Natural Resources
Environmental Protection — Air Pollution Control,
Chs.
NR 400—
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That pursuant to s.
285.11 (6), Stats., the Department of Natural Resources will hold a public hearing on revisions to Chapters
NR 422,
423,
439 and
484, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the application of reasonably available control technology emission limitations to sources of volatile organic compounds in ozone non-attainment counties, and affecting small business.
Hearing Information
December 5, 2008 Rooms 140-141
Friday DNR Southeast Region Hdqrs.
at 1:00 p.m. 2300 N. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Drive
Milwaukee
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, reasonable accommodations, including the provision of informational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call Robert Eckdale at (608) 266-2856 with specific information on your request at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled hearing.
The hearing will be held in conjunction with the hearing for Natural Resources Board Order No. AM-20-08,
CR 08-103, relating to the modification of existing rules for control of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emitted by stationary sources in the ozone nonattainment area in southeastern Wisconsin and Natural Resources Board Order No. AM-24-08,
CR 08-104, relating to VOC emission controls for industrial wastewater collection and treatment operations. The order in which the proposals will be considered will be decided at the time of hearing.
Copies of Proposed Rules and Submission of Written Comments
The proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate may be viewed and downloaded and comments electronically submitted at the following Internet site:
http://adminrules.wisconsin.gov. (Search this Web site using the Natural Resources Board Order No. AM-19-08. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted via U.S. mail to Mr. Larry Bruss, Bureau of Air Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by e-mail to
Larry.Bruss@wisconsin.gov. Comments may be submitted until December 10, 2008. Written comments whether submitted electronically or by U.S. mail will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented at the public hearings. If you do not have Internet access, a personal copy of the proposed rule and supporting documents, including the fiscal estimate may be obtained from Robert Eckdale, Bureau of Air Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or by calling (608) 266-2856.
Analysis Prepared by Department of Natural Resources
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Plain language analysis
The State Implementation Plan developed under s.
285.11(6), Stats., is revised. The Department proposes these rules to meet the requirements of Section 182(b)(2) of the federal Clean Air Act. Section 182(b)(2) requires states with moderate ozone nonattainment areas to update existing volatile organic compound (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations within one year of U.S. EPA issuing updated Control Technology Guidelines. U.S. EPA has issued revised guidelines for the paper coating, metal furniture coating, large appliance coating, flat wood paneling coating, flexible package printing, offset lithographic printing and industrial cleaning solvents industrial source categories.
Under Sec. 182(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Department is required to update its VOC Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations when EPA issues updated Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for RACT categories. These rules apply in Wisconsin's seven moderate ozone nonattainment counties (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Washington and Waukesha). More specific information is provided below.
NR 422.075: This rule applies VOC control to paper, film and foil coating lines, and solvent cleaning work practices. The rule applies new limits based on mass of VOC per mass of coating solids applied to individual coating lines emitting 25 tons per year VOC (maximum theoretical emissions) from the coating applicators and drying ovens. Paper coating lines include lines coating film and foil substrates in a uniform manner. The solvent cleaning work practices portion of the rule applies to facilities emitting 15 lb/day of uncontrolled VOC emissions from all coating lines and related coating cleaning activities at the facility. The rule requires coating line operations to achieve a 90% VOC control efficiency through the combination of installation of VOC control devices and/or use of compliant coatings based on VOC content. The rule also addresses storage and disposal requirements, control requirements, recordkeeping, compliance testing, and certification testing. Requirements in NR 422.07 continue to apply to facilities currently covered by that section.
NR 422.105, NR 422.115, NR 422.131: These rules apply VOC control to metal furniture coating, large appliance coating, flat wood panel coating and associated solvent cleaning work practices. The rules require application of new coating limits by coating type based on mass of VOC per volume of non-water coating as applied, exempt specific coating operations and apply to facilities with emissions exceeding 15 lbs/day (maximum theoretical emissions). The rules also establish a companion control requirement to utilize specific application techniques. The solvent cleaning work practices portion of the rules apply to facilities emitting 15 lb/day of uncontrolled VOC emissions from all coating lines and related activities at the facility. The rules require coating line operations to achieve a 90% VOC control efficiency through the combination of installation of VOC control devices and/or use of compliant coatings based on VOC content. The rules also address storage and disposal requirements, control requirements, recordkeeping, compliance testing, and certification testing. Requirements in NR 422.10, NR 422.11, NR 422.13 continue to apply to facilities currently covered by those sections.
NR 422.141: This rule applies VOC control to large flexible package printing presses, and associated solvent cleaning work practices. The rule applies to individual large presses emitting 25 tons per year of VOC (maximum theoretical emissions) from inks, coatings and adhesives, combined, from the press dryer. Sources may choose to reduce VOC emissions from large individual presses by either installing control systems or accepting VOC content limits for inks, coatings and adhesives. The solvent cleaning work practices portion of the rule applies to facilities emitting 15 lb/day of uncontrolled VOC emissions from all flexible package printing presses and related flexible package cleaning activities at the facility. The regulation addresses flexible package printing operations through the installation of VOC control devices, and storage and disposal requirements. Requirements in NR 422.14 continue to apply to facilities currently covered by that section.
NR 422.143: This rule applies VOC control to lithographic printing presses emitting 25 tons per year of VOC (maximum theoretical emissions) from heatset inks from the press dryer. In accordance with the CTG, the rule contains emission limitation exemptions for: up to 110 gallons of blanket or roller wash on a 12-consecutive month rolling basis, sheet-fed presses with a maximum sheet size of up to 11 inches by 17 inches, any lithographic press with a total fountain solution reservoir of less than one gallon, the printing of books on a heatset lithographic press, and heatset lithographic presses with a maximum web width of up to 22 inches. The rule also contains fountain solution VOC content limits for heatset, non-heatset, sheet-fed presses, and blanket or roller wash. The solvent cleaning work practices portion of the rule applies to facilities emitting 15 lb/day of uncontrolled VOC emissions from all lithographic printing presses and related lithographic cleaning activities at the facility. The rule also addresses storage and disposal requirements, temperature monitoring requirements, control requirements, recordkeeping requirements, compliance testing, and certification testing requirements. Requirements in NR 422.142 continue to apply to facilities currently covered by that section.
NR 423.037: This rule applies VOC controls to industrial cleaning operations at facilities emitting 6.8 kg/day (15 lb/day) of uncontrolled VOC emissions from industrial cleaning operations. The rule limits emissions by establishing solvent and solvent solution requirements, cleaning device and methods requirements, storage and disposal requirements, and recordkeeping requirements. Some industrial cleaning operations are regulated under industry specific RACT rules such as lithographic printers and large appliance manufacturers. Requirements in NR 423.035 continue to apply to facilities currently covered by that section.
Comparison with federal regulations
The Clean Air Act requires the Department to update existing VOC RACT rules when EPA issues an updated CTG. The rules for paper, film and foil coating, flat wood panel coating, furniture metal coating, large appliance coating, flexible package printing, lithographic printing, and industrial cleaning operations are based directly on the EPA CTGs. The rules regulate VOC emissions from individual printing and coating lines with emissions above specified thresholds as well as regulating VOC cleaning solvent work practices.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois and Michigan are in the same position as Wisconsin regarding potentially deficient VOC RACT rules and they need to update their rules to reflect recently updated CTGs. Both states had previously adopted VOC RACT for the categories of sources subject to this rulemaking where such sources existed in their ozone nonattainment areas. Neither state has issued proposed new or updated regulations, but both are on a schedule to incorporate the required VOC RACT updates within their ozone SIPs. Minnesota and Iowa do not have designated ozone nonattainment areas and are not deficient in regard to VOC RACT.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The new paper, film and foil coating rule, the new furniture metal coating rule, and the new large appliance coating rule are based on the 2007 EPA CTGs for these categories. The new flexible package printing rule, the new lithographic printing rule, the new flatwood panel coating rule and the new industrial cleaning operations rule are based on the 2006 EPA CTGs for these source categories. All the recommended control measures in the CTGs are incorporated into the new rules. Retention of existing RACT limitations for these categories prevents backsliding. Some industrial cleaning operations will be regulated under industry specific RACT rules for lithographic printing; flexible package printing; flat wood paneling coatings; paper film and foil coatings; large appliance coatings; and metal furniture coatings.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine the effect on small business
NR 422.075: The control requirements for individual large paper, film and foil coating lines will not impact small businesses. EPA established the number of affected facilities by surveys with consideration of state emission reporting and inventory estimates. Estimated cost per unit VOC reduced is provided by EPA in the CTG document.
An economic impact report was not requested.
NR 422.105: NR 422.115: NR 422.131: The control requirements for large metal furniture coating lines, large appliance coating lines and flatwood panel coating lines will not impact small businesses as these activities are already regulated for the facility threshold scale proposed. The coating activities and limits and control requirements reflect current industry coating types and application practices. EPA established the number of affected facilities by surveys with consideration of state emission reporting and inventory estimates. Estimated cost per unit VOC reduced is provided by EPA in the CTG document.
An economic impact report was not requested.
NR 422.141: NR 422.143: The control requirements for individual large printing flexible package printing presses and large lithographic packaging printing presses will not impact small businesses, since these large presses are not used by small businesses.
The solvent cleaning work practices are considered standard industrial practice. Most, if not all, facilities already perform good solvent cleaning work practices. The proposed rule establishes those standard work practices as requirements.
An economic impact report was not requested.
NR 423.037: The control requirements for industrial cleaning operations will not impact small businesses. The many solvent cleaning work practices are considered standard industrial practice. Most, if not all, facilities already perform good solvent cleaning work practices.
An economic impact report has not been requested.
Small Business Impact
These regulations will have a minimal economic cost to individual small businesses, because the major control requirements apply only to large facilities. Additionally, solvent cleaning work practices are considered standard industrial practice, therefore it is anticipated that most businesses affected by these rules are already implementing the requirements. More specific cost estimates are provided below.
NR 422.075: Through industry surveys EPA has estimated that no more than 7 facilities may be regulated in the large paper, foil and film coating category (inclusive of fabric and vinyl coaters regulated under NR 422.08 in Wisconsin nonattainment counties. A smaller number meet the 25 ton/coating line regulatory threshold. EPA estimated the national average cost of this RACT control as $1180/ton VOC ($2005).
NR 422.105: EPA estimated through prior survey work accomplished as background for the federal NESHAP that only143 facilities operate within ozone nonattainment areas nationwide. Comparative statistics suggest less than a dozen furniture metal coating facilities operate in Wisconsin's nonattainment area. EPA estimated the national average cost of this coating RACT control as $1670/ton VOC ($2005) with the incremental cost of the new coating limits and application practice requirements as $200/ton ($2005).
NR 422.115: For large appliance coating, EPA estimated the national average cost of this coating RACT control at $500/ton VOC ($2006).
NR 422.131: Through industry surveys, EPA has estimated that only 1 facility is likely to be regulated for flatwood panel coating in Wisconsin nonattainment counties. EPA estimated the national average cost of this coating RACT control as $1900/ton VOC ($2005) for interior and tileboard panels and $2600/ton VOC ($2005) for exterior siding.
NR 422.141: NR 422.143:
EPA estimates that the total annual cost related to the cleaning requirements per small lithographic and flexible package printing facilities is approximately $1,485 (2005 dollars).
Small business regulatory coordinator
Environmental Impact
The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Fiscal Estimate
Assumptions
These volatile organic compounds (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) rules are proposed so the Department will meet the Sec. 182(b)(2) requirement of the federal Clean Air Act. Section 182(b)(2) requires the Department to update existing VOC RACT regulations as US EPA issues updated Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for the RACT categories. US EPA released updated CTGs for the following seven source categories: flat wood paneling coating; paper, film and foil coating; large appliance coating; metal furniture coating; flexible package printing; offset lithographic printing; and industrial cleaning solvents. These rules will enable the Department to comply with the federal requirements.
Fiscal effect on state government
The rule requirements will not create a significant fiscal effect on state government because the majority of the sources affected are already inspected, permitted and otherwise regulated by the Department. There will not be a significant fiscal impact on the majority of source categories. However, the Department estimates that the industrial cleaning solvents rule will result in an estimated 400 ton/year future reduction in reported VOC emissions. Therefore, the Department may lose up to $15,000 (400 * $35.71/ton VOC) in emission fee revenue annually.
Fiscal effect on private sector
The Department believes that the proposed rules will not create a significant economic impact to private sector businesses. With a couple of minor exceptions, US EPA states in the CTGs that many facilities located in ozone nonattainment areas are already meeting the emission control levels recommended in the CTGs. In addition, the Department believes that the proposed industrial cleaning solvents work practices are already being implemented at many printing and coating facilities in the state.
State government fiscal effect
Decrease existing revenues.
