Quiero saber acerca de...

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

50462

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 172 / Thursday, September 9, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
quality modelers who supported IEPA
in its issuance of PSD permits under the delegation agreement will continue to support IEPAs issuance of PSD permits under a SIP-approved PSD program. In its submittal, IEPA stated it currently has nine full time construction permit engineers that perform construction permit activities, and that it has an adequate revenue stream from permit fees to support such activities. The commenters have not provided information that would rebut these statements from IEPAs submittal;
rather, commenters provide information that is not relevant to approval of Illinois PSD program, or that otherwise does not support commenters allegations of inadequate personnel or funding for IEPA to implement the PSD
program.
EPAs evaluation of Illinois submittal with respect to funding and personnel is based, in part, upon various sources of funding available to the state, state statutes and rules pursuant to CAA
section 110a2, and IEPAs fulfillment of grant obligations. CAA section 105
grants provide monies to help support the foundation of the states air quality program, including air monitoring, enforcement, and SIP development.
States are required to provide matching monies to receive their grant, and EPA
evaluates the performance of the State each year. As of fiscal year 2020, Illinois has satisfactorily completed its air program obligations as called for under the CAA section 105 grant, including meeting specific measures related to NSR program implementation and maintenance of an EPA-approved statewide air quality surveillance network required by section 110a2B
of the CAA.
To the extent the commenters address the adequacy of personnel or funding for Illinois title V program, they are addressing issues that are subject to statutory and regulatory evaluation that are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
CAA section 110a2 falls under title I
of the CAA and governs the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS through the SIP. CAA section 110 and 40 CFR part 51 provide mechanisms for programmatic remedies with respect to the SIP. Title I also addresses NSR
preconstruction permits for new or modified minor and major sources. The title V program, by contrast, governs operating permits for existing sources and is addressed by CAA sections 502
through 507. Any evaluation of the title V program and any consequent programmatic remedies must be done pursuant to CAA section 502 and 40
CFR part 70.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:45 Sep 08, 2021

Jkt 253001

Title V programs are generally not part of the SIP, and thus are not part of the requirements of CAA section 110a2; moreover, CAA section 502b3 requires not only that title V
program fees cover the reasonable direct and indirect costs of developing and administering the title V program, but also requires that the fees be used only to cover those costs. See 76 FR 43906, 43910 July 22, 2011 and 79 FR 62042, 62045 Oct. 16, 2014. Due to the distinct and self-administering nature of the title V program, we disagree that alleged flaws in Illinois title V program would prevent EPA from approving a SIP submittal under CAA section 110a2.5
Commenters rely on a 2019 study of funding and staffing issues at the IEPA, including in the Bureau of Air, to suggest that the decline in IEPA staff since 1980 would compromise implementation of an approved Illinois PSD program.6 We noted earlier in this section the specific staff allocation that IEPA made in its submittal for implementing the PSD program. In addition, since the 2019 study was published, staff in IEPAs Bureau of Air has increased from 157 to an estimated 167 with 190 targeted for FY 2021, and the enacted appropriation for the Bureau of Air has increased from $88,964,000 in FY 2019 to $140,825,800
in FY 2020 with $156,808,200
proposed for FY 2021.7
If, in the future, EPA determines that Illinois does not have adequate personnel or funding to carry out its SIP, or for any other reason fails to meet any requirement of its approved SIP, then EPA may exercise its authority pursuant to CAA sections 110a2E, 179, or 110k5 to impose sanctions 5 In criticizing Illinois title V program, commenters rely in part on EPAs Review of Illinois Environmental Protection Agencys New Source Review and Title V Permit Programs Sept. 2017
the 2017 Review. That review noted several improvements in IEPAs processing of PSD permits, including that it had been issuing all PSD permits within 180 days of receiving a complete application, well within the timeframe required by EPAs rules and had entered into the RACT/
BACT/LAER Clearinghouse all BACT/LAER
determinations for issued and effective permits.
2017 Review at 5, 7.
6 See Mark Templeton et al., Protecting the Illinois EPAs Health, so that It Can Protect Ours Nov. 2019, available at https chicagounbound.
uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
1000&context=abrams.
7 See Ill. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the Governor, Ill. State Operating Budget, Fiscal Year 2021, available at https www2.illinois.gov/
sites/budget/Documents/Budget%20Book/FY2021Budget-Book/Fiscal-Year-2021-Operating-BudgetBook.pdf. This is consistent with EPAs previous finding that IEPA has made improvements to its permit issuance timeliness through various efforts, including . . . additional staffing. 2017 Review at 11.

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

and other remedies on the State as allowed by the CAA. The action that EPA is taking here does not limit EPAs authority pursuant to those CAA
sections. See also 77 FR 58955, 58957
8 Sept. 25, 2012.
With respect to the concerns regarding the IPCB, the commenters have provided no information for EPA
to conclude that personnel or funding shortfalls have contributed to delays in IPCB permit appeal proceedings. There are many factors that could have resulted in lengthy permit appeal proceedings including filing of motions for delays by the appellant or responding party. One such factor, discussed in EPAs 2017 Review, was that the IPCB formerly would stay title V permits in their entirety during an appeals process.8 In 2010, Illinois enacted legislation allowing the IPCB to stay the effectiveness of any or all uncontested conditions of a title V
permit if the IPCB determines that the uncontested conditions would be affected by its review of contested conditions. See 415 ILCS 5/40.2f. As a result of this legislation, as well as IEPAs efforts to resolve appeals and issue affected permits, the number of unresolved appeals has decreased significantly since 2005.
Finally, EPA is committed to advancing EJ and incorporating equity considerations into all aspects of our work, including ongoing development of practices to better assess and consider impacts to pollution-burdened communities in our analysis, permitting, and enforcement activities.
At this time EPA does not have, nor did commenters provide, information that would suggest that approval of Illinois PSD program has the potential to result in disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts on vulnerable populations or overburdened communities; however, EPA is also not currently in a position to make a determination to this effect.
As we work to define EJ best practices at EPA, we will continue to work with IEPA and other stakeholders to ensure that robust analyses are conducted to assess the full EJ implications of siting individual facilities in communities already overburdened by pollution.
Comment: The commenters object to IEPA removing the requirement that limits on the potential to emit PTE
taken to avoid major NSR must be federally enforceable; IEPA would instead require such limits to be federally enforceable or legally and practicably enforceable by a state or local air pollution control agency. 35
8 See
E:FRFM09SER1.SGM

2017 Review at 21.

09SER1