Overview
Title
Proposed Full Approval of Revised Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; North Dakota
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The EPA is thinking about giving a thumbs up to North Dakota's new plan to keep the air clean, which means their rules will finally match the EPA's. They fixed some problems with their court rules, which is a step towards full approval, but we're not sure how much it will cost or who will benefit.
Summary AI
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing full approval of North Dakota's revised operating permit program for facilities that fall under title V of the Clean Air Act. The proposed approval follows North Dakota's amendments to its program to meet federal compliance requirements, which were previously not fully approvable due to issues with state judicial review laws. Comments on this proposal are due by March 26, 2021. If there are no negative comments, the EPA will proceed with a final ruling; otherwise, further action will address any concerns raised.
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the "Agency") is proposing full approval of the revised and recodified North Dakota operating permit program for stationary sources subject to title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the "Act"). On August 6, 2018, North Dakota submitted a request for approval of its revisions to the North Dakota operating permit program (the "title V program") for stationary sources subject to title V of the CAA and recodification of the State's title V program under a new title of the North Dakota Administrative Code (NDAC). The EPA determined that the revised and recodified program substantially met the requirements of title V of the Act and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) but was not fully approvable because the State law provisions for judicial review were not consistent with program requirements found in the CFR. Thus, EPA issued an interim approval of North Dakota's title V program. North Dakota has made the changes required for full program approval. Accordingly, the EPA is proposing this action in accordance with the CAA and CFR title V program approval requirements.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question discusses a proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the approval of revisions to North Dakota's operating permit program for facilities under title V of the Clean Air Act. The proposal follows North Dakota's efforts to amend its program to align with federal requirements, particularly surrounding judicial review provisions that were previously deemed inconsistent. This approval proposal was filed in the Federal Register with a request for public comments due by March 26, 2021.
General Summary
The EPA seeks to fully approve North Dakota's revised operating permit program. Previously, the program received only interim approval due to discrepancies in the state's judicial review laws compared to federal standards. North Dakota has since modified its regulatory framework, prompting the EPA's current proposal for full approval. Public input is solicited, and if no significant opposition is voiced, the EPA will finalize the approval.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One notable omission in the document is the lack of discussion about the financial implications of implementing North Dakota's revised program. This missing detail is crucial for taxpayers and stakeholders seeking to understand potential costs or savings associated with the approval. Additionally, the technical language employed throughout the document may not be easily accessible to those without expertise in environmental regulatory affairs, potentially leaving some citizens in the dark regarding the precise nature of the changes.
Moreover, there is no clear indication of how North Dakota specifically addressed the prior judicial review inconsistencies, raising questions about the adequacy and thoroughness of the revised provisions. Without this transparency, there may be ongoing concerns about whether the changes fully resolve the issues that previously hindered full approval.
Potential Public Impact
On a broader scale, this proposal reflects efforts to maintain environmental oversight at both state and federal levels, aiming to ensure that industrial activities comply with air quality standards. An approved operating permit program can lead to more structured and effective monitoring and management of air pollution, thereby enhancing environmental protection efforts and public health.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For industry stakeholders and businesses operating within North Dakota, this full approval proposal might bring more clarity and stability to regulatory expectations, potentially simplifying compliance by aligning state and federal requirements. However, if approval leads to stricter oversight or increased operational costs, businesses may experience financial impacts.
Conversely, residents and environmental advocacy groups may view the proposal as a positive step toward ensuring better environmental protection and accountability. The emphasis on aligning state and federal standards can offer reassurance that regulatory measures are both comprehensive and enforceable, potentially leading to improved air quality and health outcomes for communities.
In summary, while the proposed approval of North Dakota's title V program revisions appears to be a move towards greater regulatory alignment and environmental stewardship, the lack of clarity regarding financial impacts and judicial review changes may warrant further examination and dialogue before the final decision is rendered.
Issues
• The document does not specify the estimated financial impact or cost associated with implementing the full approval of the North Dakota title V program. This lack of financial information may be considered a missing detail in the context of assessing potential wasteful spending.
• There is no mention of any specific organizations or individuals that may benefit directly from the approval of the North Dakota title V program, which leaves some ambiguity around potential favoritism.
• The language used in the document is relatively technical, which might make it difficult for individuals without expertise in environmental regulation or law to understand, particularly in sections discussing CFR requirements.
• There is no discussion on how the changes in judicial review provisions were met, leaving some ambiguity as to whether the changes fully address previous concerns.