"
Strong,
Phyllis"
<
Phyllis.
Strong@
state
.
mn.
us>

08/
14/
03
05:
08
PM
To:
Steve
Hitte/
RTP/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
cc:
Karen
Brown/
DC/
USEPA/
US@
EPA,
Karen
Blanchard/
RTP/
USEPA/
U
Subject:
Area
So
Here
is
a
letter
from
the
Region
5
Small
Business
Assistance
Programs/
Small
Business
Ombudsmen
concerning
the
area
source
Title
5
deferral.
This
letter
contains
information
and
concerns
from
these
Region
5
programs
for
your
consideration
as
you
address
this
deferral
issue.
<<
title
5
deferral.
doc>>

Phyllis
Strong
Small
Business
Assistance
Program
Phone
(
651)
282­
5847,
or
(
800)
657­
3938
Fax
(
651)
297­
8701
August
15,
2003
Mr.
Steven
J.
Hitte
C304­
04
USEPA
Mailroom
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711
Dear
Mr.
Hitte:

RE:
Title
V
Deferral
for
40
CFR
Part
63
Subparts,
M,
N,
O,
T,
X,
and
RRR
This
letter
represents
a
compilation
of
the
concerns
and
information
from
the
Small
Business
Assistance
Programs
/
Small
Business
Ombudsmen
(
SBAP/
SBO)
of
EPA
Region
5
in
response
to
your
request
for
information.
These
state
programs
are
from
Illinois
(
IL),
Indiana
(
IN),
Michigan
(
MI),
Minnesota
(
MN),
Ohio
(
OH),
and
Wisconsin
(
WI).
It
is
the
recommendation
of
the
Region
5
SBAP/
SBO's
that
these
area
sources
not
be
required
to
obtain
a
Title
V
permit.

From
section
505(
a)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA),
"
The
Administrator
may
 .
promulgate
regulations
to
exempt
one
or
more
source
categories
(
in
whole
or
in
part)
from
the
requirements
of
(
Title
V)
if
the
Administrator
finds
that
compliance
with
such
(
Title
V)
requirements
is
impracticable,
infeasible,
or
unnecessarily
burdensome
on
such
categories ."

In
order
for
EPA
to
exempt
area
sources
from
Title
V
permitting,
EPA
must
make
a
determination
based
on
the
above
factors.

A
possible
justification
to
exempt
a
particular
source
category
would
be
to
document
what
states/
sources
are
doing
to
adequately
assure
compliance
with
the
particular
standard,
and
why
that
process
is
more
practical,
feasible,
and
less
burdensome
on
the
sources
than
the
Title
V
permitting
process.

SBAP/
SBO
programs
are
in
place
as
a
result
of
Section
507
of
the
CAA
which
calls
for
the
establishment
of
small
business
stationary
source
technical
and
environmental
compliance
assistance
programs.
All
SBAP/
SBO
programs
have
similar
mandates
and
do
similar
work.
Offering
compliance
assistance
for
the
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
(
NESHAPs)
with
area
source
Title
V
deferrals
has
been
an
underlying
body
of
work
for
all
SBAP/
SBO
programs.
Offering
this
assistance
through
site
visits,
phone
consultations,
workshops,
mass
mailings,
and
newsletters
are
common
practices
throughout
all
the
SBAP/
SBO
programs
in
the
nation.
This
process
is
more
practical,
feasible,
and
less
burdensome
on
these
sources
then
the
Title
V
permitting
process.
The
EPA
should
take
the
work
of
all
SBAP/
SBO
programs
into
account
when
making
decisions
on
area
source
permitting.
Mr.
Steven
J.
Hitte
Page
2
Region
5
SBAP/
SBO
programs
have
offered
compliance
assistance
for
the
NESHAPs
with
area
source
Title
V
deferrals
since
the
promulgation
of
these
NESHAPs.
Education
and
outreach
opportunities
offered
to
these
sources
are
addressed
in
appendix
1
of
this
letter;
examples
of
Region
5
work
specific
to
particular
NESHAPs
are
shown.

Other
state
SBAP/
SBO
programs
will
have
additional
information
on
all
the
work
that
they
do
for
these
NESHAPs;
any
information
you
can
get
from
them
should
be
helpful
to
you.
One
tool
that
might
assist
you
in
your
search
for
information
can
be
found
at
the
Small
Business
Environmental
Home
Page.
The
results
of
a
national
survey
of
these
programs
are
posted
here.
The
results
show
the
types
of
approaches
these
programs
used
to
offer
compliance
assistance.
Go
to
www.
smallbiz­
enviroweb.
org/
multimedia/
multimedia.
asp
and
click
on
search
multimedia
questions.

The
foundation
of
a
Title
V
permit
is
to
clarify
and
consolidate
the
requirements
for
a
source
into
one
document.
Additionally,
the
Title
V
permitting
process
requires
public
participation.
Therefore,
the
Title
V
permit
should
be
written
such
that
a
`
lay
person'
is
able
to
comprehend
the
emissions,
processes,
and
requirements
of
the
source.
The
reality
is
that
the
Title
V
permit
has
become
a
bulky
compilation
of
regulations
written
in
legalese
language
according
to
environmental
counsel.
The
greater
part
of
the
workload
for
Title
V
permit
writers,
company
environmental
staff,
and
EPA
reviewers
is
trying
to
digest
cumbersome
regulatory
language
and
attempting
to
apply
it
to
a
particular
company.
In
many
Title
V
programs,
permit
writers
must
cut
and
paste
language
directly
from
a
rule
into
the
permit
in
order
to
satisfy
lawyers.
The
permit
writers
have
no
choice
but
to
write
permits
that
read
like
legal
briefs.
This
does
not
reflect
on
the
abilities
or
efforts
of
these
writers,
but
reflects
on
the
Title
V
permit
itself.
If
the
very
staff
that
is
responsible
for
writing,
determining
compliance,
and
enforcing
these
regulations
find
the
Title
V
permit
process
to
be
complex
and
cumbersome,
it
is
understandable
that
it
would
be
even
more
complex
and
cumbersome
for
small
businesses.
Thus,
it
would
be
unreasonable
to
place
this
burden
upon
small
businesses.

The
Title
V
program
is
not
designed
for
small
businesses.
Small
businesses
frequently
do
not
have
the
expertise
and
resources
to
develop
a
Title
V
permit
application,
negotiate
the
applicable
requirements
with
the
regulatory
agency,
and
then
decipher
a
myriad
of
legal
regulatory
language
as
they
attempt
to
demonstrate
compliance.

Similar
to
a
Title
V
permit,
the
NESHAP
requirements
are
also
filled
with
legal
language.
Therefore,
subjecting
a
source
to
a
Title
V
permitting
process
above
and
beyond
the
regulatory
requirements
within
NESHAPs
would
only
compound
the
compliance
issue
for
small
businesses.
In
fact,
it
could
potentially
trigger
a
decrease
in
compliance
and
eventually
result
in
the
shutdown
of
businesses.
Many
small
business
owners
are
not
even
attempting
to
see
if
they
are
in
compliance
with
environmental
regulations
because
these
regulations
have
become
so
perplexing.
Mr.
Steven
J.
Hitte
Page
3
It
is
not
always
necessary
to
require
a
Title
V
permit
to
gain
environmental
benefit.
The
NESHAPs
themselves
provide
environmental
benefit.
Instead
of
complicating
the
process,
look
at
what
these
small
businesses
really
need
to
do
to
come
into
compliance
with
an
applicable
NESHAP.
Let
this
be
the
true
objective.
In
our
discussions
with
small
business
owners,
trade
associations,
and
consultants,
the
common
theme
is
`
just
tell
me
what
I
need
to
do
and
I
will
do
it.'
We
recommend
that
a
program
similar
to
Massachusetts'
Environmental
Results
Program
be
utilized
to
provide
a
`
plain
language'
compliance
document
and
audit
checklist
for
each
of
the
NESHAP
standards.
Providing
documents
and
checklists
that
the
small
business
owners
can
understand
would
help
facilitate
the
goal
of
compliance.
The
resources
that
would
be
used
to
develop
and
implement
the
Title
V
process
for
these
area
sources
would
be
directed
to
developing
a
plain­
language
compliance
assistance
program
that
the
small
businesses
can
understand
and
embrace.
State
programs
already
have
some
of
these
tools
available,
making
it
easy
for
them
to
take
this
approach.
For
example,
WI
has
an
annual
compliance
calendar
that
dry
cleaners
must
submit
to
the
WI
Department
of
Natural
Resources
(
WI
DNR).
If
WI
added
a
self­
audit
/
self
certification
style
checklist
to
this
annual
calendar,
submittals
to
the
WI
DNR
would
serve
as
a
more
complete
method
to
monitor
compliance.
It
is
our
belief
that
this
approach
would
better
serve
the
sources,
and
would
probably
show
a
good
compliance
rate
as
well.

The
additional
benefit
of
the
Title
V
program
is
public
participation.
Any
intent
of
the
Title
V
program
of
increasing
public
participation
has
been
lost
by
difficult
to
understand
Title
V
permits.
Regulators
struggle
with
understanding
the
requirements
of
a
NESHAP.
How
can
we
expect
the
general
public
to
easily
understand
them?
Replacing
the
cumbersome
Title
V
permits
with
easy
to
understand
compliance
documents
and
audit
checklists
would
increase
the
public
awareness
of
a
source's
requirements.
The
design
of
the
plain­
language
format
would
allow
the
public
to
more
easily
determine
the
compliance
status
of
the
company.

It
does
not
make
sense
to
require
these
small
operations
to
spend
the
time,
money,
and
effort
on
a
Title
V
permit.
It
will
not
improve
compliance
rates
nor
will
it
improve
the
environment
in
anyway.
It
will
simply
increase
the
paperwork
burden
on
these
businesses
and
dissuade
future
entrepreneurs
from
starting
any
of
these
types
of
businesses
because
they
are
so
heavily
regulated.
The
National
Federation
of
Independent
Businesses
(
NFIB)
Regulatory
Impact
Model
could
be
used
to
show
the
costs
and
economic
burden
caused
by
permitting
these
thousands
of
small
businesses.
This
type
of
information
and
the
support
of
NFIB,
Small
Business
Administration,
International
Fabricare
Institute,
etc.
should
be
considered
by
EPA
when
weighing
the
exemption
route
for
these
sources.

The
general
theory
is
that
permitting
is
the
first
step
of
accountability
and
enforcement.
This
may
or
may
not
be
true.
But
it
was
the
assumption
made
when
the
CAA
was
written
to
require
Title
V
permits
from
all
these
sources.
This
could
explain
EPA's
focus
on
compliance
rates
to
determine
whether
or
not
Title
V
permits
are
needed.

It
is
good
to
look
at
the
issue
from
a
more
holistic
approach.
Besides
compliance
rates,
EPA
should
look
at
this
issue
with
respect
to
environmental
benefit.
Mr.
Steven
J.
Hitte
Page
4
What
environmental
benefit
is
there
for
area
sources
to
get
a
Title
V
permit
when
they
are
already
subject
to
a
NESHAP?
Unless
we
decide
to
impose
additional
requirements
in
the
permit,
there
does
not
appear
to
be
any
environmental
benefit
to
issuing
Title
V
permits
to
these
sources.
Absent
any
additional
permit
requirements
(
which
is
not
advocated),
issuing
a
permit
to
these
area
sources
would
be
a
meaningless,
but
extremely
burdensome,
paper
shuffle.

For
these
area
sources,
obtaining
a
permit
would
have
little
effect
on
their
compliance
status.
The
facilities
that
would
normally
be
in
compliance
before
permit
issuance
would
be
in
compliance
afterward.
The
facilities
that
would
normally
not
be
in
compliance
before
permit
issuance
would
probably
not
be
in
compliance
after
permit
issuance.
Regardless,
the
state
regulatory
agency
and
EPA
have
the
ability
to
correct
a
noncompliance
situation
at
these
area
sources
whether
or
not
they
have
been
issued
a
permit.
Issuing
Title
V
permits
to
these
area
source
facilities
will
not
accomplish
compliance;
adding
staff
that
can
get
to
them
with
assistance
will.

Compliance
information
for
Region
5
is
addressed
in
appendix
2.
The
Minnesota
Pollution
Control
Agency
has
conducted
enforcement
work
with
area
sources
subject
to
these
NESHAPs;
lack
of
a
permit
did
not
stop
this
action.
Illinois
EPA
(
IL
EPA)
also
has
conducted
enforcement
work
with
area
sources
subject
to
these
NESHAPs.
IL
EPA
proceeded
with
these
enforcement
actions,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
a
permit
was
required.
Enforcement
work
of
NESHAPs
can
occur
regardless
of
whether
or
not
a
facility
has
an
air
emissions
permit.
Since
an
affected
source
is
required
to
notify
the
state
regulatory
agency
and
the
U.
S.
EPA
that
they
are
affected
by
the
NESHAP
and
must
comply
fully
with
the
NESHAP,
enforcement
opportunities
are
available.

Focusing
on
environmental
benefit
with
respect
to
the
Perchloroethylene
Dry
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
consider
the
following
information:

The
MN
Dept.
of
Revenue
provided
amounts
of
perchloroethylene
(
perc)
purchased
on
an
annual
basis
since
they
began
collecting
fees
on
perc
purchases
for
a
dry
cleaning
clean­
up
fund.
This
clean­
up
fund
has
been
put
in
place
since
the
NESHAP
became
effective.
Perc
purchases
show
a
marked
decline;
they
have
been
more
than
cut
in
half
since
these
fees
began
in
July
of
1995.
See
the
data
provided
in
Table
3.1
in
Attachment
3.

MN's
Small
Business
Environmental
Improvement
Loan
Program
has
given
low
interest
loans
to
drycleaners
for
the
purchase
of
new
equipment.
Equipment
purchased
included
state­
of­
the­
art
refrigerated
dry­
to­
dry
perc
machines,
an
aqueous
machine,
and
a
Green
Earth
(
a
silicone
based
solvent)
machine.
See
the
data
provided
in
Table
3.1
in
Attachment
3.
This
loan
program
has
been
put
in
place
since
the
NESHAP
became
effective.

MI
data
confirms
what
MN
has
found.
MI
has
a
Small
Business
Environmental
Improvement
Loan
program
similar
to
MN's
and
shows
reductions
in
perc
purchases
as
well.
See
the
data
provided
in
Table
3.2
in
Attachment
3.
The
imposition
of
fees
on
perc
purchases,
the
availability
of
better
equipment,
and
the
pollution
prevention
measures
built
into
the
NESHAP
work
together
to
reduce
the
amount
of
perc
used.

In
lieu
of
permitting
these
area
sources
as
a
means
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
NESHAPs,
EPA
should
consider
the
State
SBAP/
SBO
programs
as
a
means
to
provide
compliance
assistance
to
these
sources.
It
is
the
network
of
SBAP/
SBO
programs,
and
not
the
Title
V
program,
that
is
equipped
to
address
the
needs
of
small
business
sources
and
provide
them
with
the
tools
necessary
to
comply
with
the
area
source
NESHAPs.
These
area
sources
should
be
exempted
from
the
requirement
to
obtain
a
Title
V
permit.

Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
present
this
information
for
your
consideration.

Respectfully,

Phyllis
Strong
Region
5
SBAP/
SBO
Representative
PS:
ls
Enclosures
1
Attachment
1
Education
and
Outreach
Table
1.1
IL
Source
Education
and
Outreach
Perchloroethylene
Dry
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
 
The
Illinois
Small
Business
Environmental
Assistance
Program
(
IL
SBAP)
has
worked
closely
with
the
Illinois
EPA
(
IL
EPA)
in
assisting
the
approximate
1600
perc
dry
cleaners
in
IL.
 
The
IL
EPA
conducted
a
series
of
inspector
training
sessions
for
the
Chicago
Department
of
the
Environment,
Cook
County
and
their
own
field
staff.
The
IL
EPA
worked
with
the
Illinois
State
Fabricare
Association,
the
Korean
Dry
Cleaners
Association
and
the
IL
SBAP
to
hold
34
workshops
and
seminars
throughout
the
state
in
which
960
dry
cleaners
attended.
Information
booths
were
set
up
at
various
dry
cleaning
conventions
and
trade
shows.
Regulatory
classes
were
conducted
with
industry
participants.
 
State
air
permit
application
forms,
compliance
report
forms,
fact
sheets
and
posters
were
developed
and
distributed
by
IL
EPA
and
IL
SBAP.
 
In
1997,
the
IL
EPA
and
the
IL
SBAP
surveyed
1370
of
the
perc
dry
cleaners
including
200
of
them
over
the
phone
concerning
the
outreach
mentioned
above.
The
survey
results
deemed
that
the
majority
of
the
assistance
was
both
understandable
and
beneficial.
 
Both
the
IL
EPA
and
the
IL
SBAP
assisted
in
the
development
of
regulatory
guidance
for
the
Dry
Cleaner
Environmental
Response
Trust
Fund
(
Fund)
and
the
Illinois
State
Fabricare
Association
Star
Program,
an
environmental
management
program.
The
IL
SBAP
provided
regulatory
information
at
20
Fund
workshops.
 
The
IL
SBAP
has
developed
and
distributed
over
2000
dry
cleaner
record
keeping
calendars
each
year
for
the
past
four
consecutive
years
to
help
dry
cleaners
meet
the
requirements
of
this
NESHAP.
These
calendars
are
not
only
useful
for
perc
dry
cleaners,
but
can
be
used
by
all
IL
dry
cleaning
operations
to
meet
their
record
keeping
needs.
The
calendar
includes
information
on
ownership
and
name
change
forms,
compliance
reporting
forms,
updated
regulatory
information
and
other
miscellaneous
information
including
P2
tips.
 
Regulatory
updates
are
published
in
the
IL
SBAP's
Clean
Air
Clips,
a
quarterly
newsletter
mailed
to
small
businesses
and
chambers
of
commerce.

Chromium
Electroplating
and
Anodizing
NESHAP
The
IL
SBAP
assisted
in
outreach
to
chromium
electroplaters
and
anodizers
concerning
the
NESHAP
initial
notification
form
and
in
obtaining
air
emission
permits.
The
IL
SBAP
was
involved
with
IL
EPA's
small
business
amnesty
program,
Clean
Break,
which
included
chromium
electroplaters
and
anodizers.

Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
The
IL
SBAP
assisted
in
outreach
to
the
228
potentially
impacted
sources
with
the
initial
notification
and
with
reminders
concerning
compliance
dates.
The
IL
SBAP
assisted
the
IL
EPA
with
the
outreach
to
make
sure
the
information
was
given
in
understandable
format.
They
also
worked
with
Detrex
Corporation,
Illinois
Waste
Management
Research
Center,
and
IL
EPA
on
developing
four
workshops
in
spring
of
1997
to
discuss
regulatory
obligations
and
to
offer
assistance
through
the
Clean
Break
amnesty
program.
IL
SBAP
will
be
working
with
IL
EPA's
compliance
section
on
updating
an
annual
reporting
form
to
be
potentially
consolidated
with
a
yearly
reporting
form
already
required
of
permitted
sources.

Secondary
Aluminum
Production
Facility
NESHAP
The
IL
SBAP
assisted
in
the
outreach
with
the
initial
notification
and
with
follow­
up
notifications
since
the
rule
change.
The
IL
SBAP
will
assist
IL
EPA
and
Lake
Michigan
Air
Directors
Consortium
with
notifications
and
development
of
tools
for
the
training
of
Region
V
state
environmental
personnel
concerning
this
rule.
The
IL
SBAP
will
assist
in
the
continued
education
of
the
23
area
sources
identified
as
affected
by
the
rule.

Ethylene
Oxide
Emissions
Standards
for
Sterilization
Facilities
The
IL
SBAP
assisted
one
impacted
company
to
obtain
their
temporary
Title
V
permit
application
until
U.
S.
EPA
revised
this
NESHAP
concerning
the
fumigation
room
discharge
and
other
technical
issues.
2
Table
1.2
MI
Area
Source
Education
and
Outreach
MI
SBAP
&
MI
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
40
CFR
63
subpart
N
Chrome
40
CFR
63
subpart
T
Degreaser
40
CFR
63
subpart
M
Dry
Cleaners
40
CFR
63
subpart
RRR
Secondary
Al
Q&
A
X
X
Fact
Sheet
X
X
X
X
Record
keeping
forms
X
X
Reporting
forms
X
X
X
Plain
Language
Guidebook
X
Teleconferences
X
X
X
Workshops
X
Table
1.3
MN
Area
Source
Education
and
Outreach
Perchloroethylene
Dry
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
MN
SBAP
has
provided
compliance
support
for
this
NESHAP
by
hosting
a
national
satellite
broadcast
of
training
for
this
NESHAP,
conducting
6
workshops
around
the
state
for
compliance
with
this
NESHAP,
regularly
staffing
a
booth
and
sometimes
making
presentations
at
annual
meetings
of
the
state
dry
cleaning
trade
association,
developing
a
series
of
self­
evaluation
checklists
for
drycleaners
including
a
checklist
addressing
this
NESHAP,
developing
a
compliance
calendar
that
addresses
this
NESHAP
and
distributing
it
to
all
dry
cleaners
in
the
state,
and
posting
these
checklists
and
calendar,
NESHAP
notification
forms
on
an
industry
sector
page
on
the
internet
that
contains
a
direct
link
to
the
rule.
To
see
an
example
of
a
checklist,
go
to
www.
pca.
state.
mn.
us/
publications/
ea2­
03.
pdf
and
look
at
MN
SBAP's
Dry
Cleaner
Self­
Evaluation
Checklist
 
Air
Quality.

Chromium
Electroplating
and
Anodizing
NESHAP
MN
SBAP
has
provided
compliance
support
for
this
NESHAP
by
hosting
a
national
satellite
broadcast
of
training
for
this
NESHAP,
and
posting
NESHAP
notification
forms
on
an
industry
sector
page
on
the
internet
that
contains
a
direct
link
to
the
rule.

Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
MN
SBAP
has
provided
compliance
support
for
this
NESHAP
by
hosting
a
national
satellite
broadcast
of
training
for
this
NESHAP,
conducting
2
interactive
video
classes
that
linked
sites
across
the
state
where
one
focused
on
the
basics
of
the
rule
and
the
other
focused
on
choices
for
compliance,
and
by
posting
NESHAP
notification
forms
on
an
industry
sector
page
on
the
internet
that
contains
a
direct
link
to
the
rule.

Secondary
Aluminum
Production
Facility
NESHAP
MN
SBAP
assisted
with
sending
the
initial
notification
to
sources
potentially
affected
by
this
NESHAP
and
provided
updates
of
changes
through
their
small
business
newsletter.
3
Table
1.4
WI
Area
Source
Education
and
Outreach
Perchloroethylene
Dry
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
WI
SBAP
has
provided
the
following
compliance
tools
for
these
sources:
multiple
on­
site
visits
along
with
regulatory
staff
to
provide
multimedia
assistance;
periodically
providing
information
booths
and/
or
making
presentations
at
semi­
annual
meetings
of
the
Wisconsin
Fabricare
Institute;
developing
the
compliance
calendar
addressing
the
NESHAP
and
other
WI
regulations
and
distributing
to
all
licensed
dry
cleaners
in
the
state;
posting
fact
sheets
and
notification
forms
for
the
NESHAP
on
a
program
web
page
organized
by
industry
sector.

Chromium
Electroplating
and
Anodizing
NESHAP
WI
SBAP
has
provided
compliance
tools
for
this
NESHAP
by
way
of
posting
fact
sheets,
example
record
keeping,
monitoring
and
reporting
forms,
and
notification
forms
for
specific
NESHAP
requirements
on
a
program
web
page
organized
by
industry
sector.

Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
WI
SBAP
has
provided
compliance
tools
for
this
NESHAP
by
way
of
posting
fact
sheets
and
notification
forms
for
specific
NESHAP
requirements
on
a
program
web
page
organized
by
industry
sector.

Secondary
Aluminum
Production
Facility
NESHAP
WI
SBAP
has
provided
the
following
compliance
support
for
this
NESHAP:
mailing
postcards
to
potentially
affected
sources
to
notify
them
of
their
compliance
responsibilities
prior
to
the
compliance
due
date,
and
posting
fact
sheets
and
notification
forms
for
specific
NESHAP
requirements
on
a
program
web
page
specific
to
new
regulations.
1
Attachment
2
Compliance
Table
2.1
IL
Compliance
Information
Permitting
Other
than
perc
dry
cleaners
using
less
than
360
gallons
of
perc,
most
of
these
area
sources
have
permits
under
IL's
existing
state
operating
permit
program.

Perchloroethylene
Dry
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
 
The
IL
EPA
has
permitted,
under
their
state
program,
perc
dry
cleaners
that
use
over
360
gallons
of
perc
each
year.
 
The
Dry
Cleaner
Environmental
Response
Trust
Fund
(
Fund)
requires
dry
cleaners
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
all
applicable
environmental
laws
and
be
enrolled
in
an
environmental
management
program,
such
as
the
Illinois
State
Fabricare
Association
Star
Program,
to
receive
reimbursement
for
clean­
up
activities.
 
A
perc
dry
cleaner
cannot
purchase
perc
without
being
licensed
through
the
Fund.
In
order
to
renew
their
license
each
year,
the
dry
cleaners
must
provide
a
copy
of
the
records
required
by
this
NESHAP,
including
their
perc
purchase
receipts.
 
Most
recently
the
IL
SBAP
compared
the
list
of
licensed
perc
cleaners
from
the
Fund
to
those
permitted
at
the
IL
EPA.
Only
eight
sources
were
found
that
might
need
a
state
permit
and
did
not
have
one.
The
rest
that
needed
permits
had
them.
 
Approximately
600
dry
cleaners
were
inspected
by
the
City
of
Chicago
and
Cook
County
in
fiscal
year
2000.
More
than
200
dry
cleaners
volunteered
for
on­
site
assistance
during
the
Clean
Break
amnesty
program.
It
was
determined
that
most
dry
cleaners
are
in
compliance
with
the
core
requirements
of
this
NESHAP
but
had
problems
with
the
recordkeeping
requirement.
The
dry
cleaning
calendar
provided
by
IL
SBAP
helps
resolve
this
issue.
 
The
approach
is
to
work
closely
with
the
dry
cleaners
prior
to
initiating
formal
enforcement
action.

Chromium
Electroplating
and
Anodizing
NESHAP
 
All
electroplaters,
including
chromium,
are
required
to
have
a
state
permit
with
IL
EPA.
There
are
approximately
65
or
more
chrome
electroplaters
that
are
permitted
at
the
present
time.
 
Inspections
have
been
performed
on
all
or
most
chrome
electroplaters.
 
IL
EPA's
small
business
amnesty
program,
Clean
Break,
included
electroplaters.
The
most
common
compliance
issue
found
during
this
program
was
platers
operating
without
a
permit
and
not
knowing
one
was
required.
NESHAP
requirements
were
not
allowed
under
the
"
amnesty
agreements".

Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaning
Equipment
NESHAP
 
All
halogenated
solvent
cleaners,
unless
specifically
exempted,
are
required
to
have
a
state
permit
with
IL
EPA.
 
Many
of
these
sources
have
been
inspected
during
routine
inspections.

Ethylene
Oxide
Emissions
Standards
for
Sterilization
Facilities
 
All
ethylene
oxide
sterilizers
are
permitted
with
IL
EPA.

 
The
five
sources
impacted
by
this
NESHAP
have
been
inspected.
2
Table
2.2
OH
Compliance
Information
Reflecting
the
position
of
the
Ohio
SBAP
and
not
the
whole
of
Ohio
EPA
Ohio
requires
and
issues
both
installation
and
operating
permits
for
dry
cleaners.
There
are
approximately
1100
dry
cleaners
in
the
state,
but
not
100%
of
them
are
in
the
permit
system
currently.
All
Ohio
dry
cleaners
need
air
permits
for
installation
and
operation.
They
are
not
exempted.
Needing
a
Title
V
permit
will
transform
the
current
operating
permit
process
into
something
much
harder
for
them
to
understand.

Ohio
companies
must
submit
Title
V
applications,
annual
fee
emissions
reports,
and
compliance
certifications
electronically
using
the
state
provided
STARShip
software.
There
is
no
option
for
hard
copy
submission.
The
Ohio
EPA
regularly
provides
STARShip
training
($
80
for
companies,
$
195
for
consultants,
which
includes
1.5
days
hands­
on
instruction
at
a
computer,
software,
and
user's
manual).
Small
businesses
will
either
invest
the
time
and
money
into
the
training,
or
hire
a
trained
consultant
for
much
more
money
to
prepare
their
Title
V
application
for
them.
An
estimate
on
how
long
it
would
take
an
average
dry
cleaner
to
submit
a
Title
V
application
via
STARShip
or
how
much
a
consultant
would
charge
for
such
a
relatively
simple
Title
V
application
is
not
available
at
this
time.

Ohio's
dry
cleaning
permits
are
lengthy
and
detailed,
much
like
WI
and
MI
programs.
Ohio's
State
Implementation
Plan
and
state
laws
require
that
all
environmental
requirements
be
specifically
spelled
out
in
individual
permits.
U.
S.
EPA
requires
that
Ohio
spell
out
all
NESHAP
requirements
in
permits.
These
requirements
can
not
be
incorporated
by
reference.
This
is
a
key
requirement
in
Ohio's
full
delegation
of
NESHAP
regulations.
This
causes
the
current
permits
to
have
a
lot
of
"
legalese".
A
Title
V
permit
would
probably
not
look
any
different.

Ohio
EPA
has
traditionally
had
a
pretty
active
inspection
program.
Current
requirements
are
to
inspect
half
of
the
Title
V
facilities
and
20%
of
the
synthetic
minors/
FESOPs
annually.
There
is
still
debate
on
the
inspection
frequency
of
non­
Title
V
facilities,
non­
Title
V
NESHAP,
etc.
Some
dry
cleaners
are
inspected
after
being
issued
an
installation
permit.
OH
SBAP
thinks
that
field
offices
have
inspected
a
fairly
large
number
of
dry
cleaners
in
the
past
3
years.
OH
SBAP
did
not
have
any
compliance
data
compiled
and
available.
If
dry
cleaners
are
added
to
the
Title
V
mix,
that
would
more
than
double
the
amount
of
annual
inspections
required
(
375/
yr
now
vs.
935/
yr
by
just
adding
dry
cleaners).
Resources
are
not
currently
available
to
handle
a
doubling
in
work
load.

Table
2.3
MI
Compliance
Information
40
CFR
63
NESHAP
#
of
Area
Sources
Subpart
Affected
by
NESHAP
per
Initial
Notifications*
M
Perchloroethylene
dry
cleaning
912
N
and
T
Chrome
Electroplating
&
Anodizing
and
Halgenated
Solvent
Cleaning
166
O
Ethylene
Oxide
Sterilizers
2
X
Secondary
Lead
Smelters
0
RRR
Secondary
Aluminum
Production
3
*
These
MI
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
numbers
are
from
initial
notifications
and
are
questionable.
Not
all
indicated
whether
the
source
was
a
major
or
area
source;
some
may
not
have
updated
their
notifications
as
to
business
closing,
etc.
3
Table
2.4
MN
Compliance
Information*

*
Minnesota
Pollution
Control
Agency
(
MPCA)
does
not
have
many
compliance
statistics
on
the
submittals
received.
MPCA
needs
more
compliance
staff
to
fully
track
compliance
vs.
noncompliance.
40
CFR
63
NESHAP
#
of
Area
Sources
Subpart
Affected
by
NESHAP
per
Initial
Notifications**
M
Perchloroethylene
dry
cleaning
315
N
Chromium
Electroplating
&
Anodizing
27
O
Ethylene
Oxide
Sterilizers
1
T
Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaning
25
X
Secondary
Lead
Smelters
0
RRR
Secondary
Aluminum
Production
26
**
The
numbers
are
from
initial
notifications
and
are
questionable.
Not
all
indicated
whether
the
source
was
a
major
or
area
source;
some
may
not
have
updated
their
notifications
as
to
business
closing,
etc.

Table
2.5
WI
Compliance
Information*

*
Wisconsin
Department
of
Natural
Resources
(
WI
DNR)
does
not
have
many
statistics
on
the
submittals
received.
WI
DNR
data
is
lacking
due
to
lack
of
staff
to
inspect
so
many
sources.
(
This
is
similar
to
the
situation
in
MN.)
40
CFR
63
Subpart
Compliance
Information
M
Dry
Cleaners
are
generally
not
inspected
thus
no
compliance
data
is
available.

N
Around
65­
75%
of
the
chromium
electroplaters
and
anodizers
have
been
inspected
since
1997
and
around
35%
of
them
have
been
found
to
be
out
of
compliance.
Also,
approximately
1/
3
of
these
sources
have
been
issued
permits.
Those
found
out
of
compliance
include
sources
both
with
and
without
permits.

O
and
T
Ethylene
Oxide
Sterilizers
and
Halogenated
Solvent
Cleaners
have
been
permitted
as
part
of
a
larger
facility
with
other
emissions
units.
No
effort
has
been
made
to
specifically
track
these
sources
for
compliance
with
the
NESHAP.
It
would
be
necessary
to
review
all
permits
and
inspection
reports
from
the
time
these
NESHAPs
were
promulgated
to
develop
tracking
data
on
these
source
categories.

RRR
Since
the
Secondary
Aluminum
MACT
is
so
new,
no
data
is
available
beyond
contacts
made
with
the
WI
SBAP.
The
WI
SBAP
has
had
discussions
with
a
few
sources
regarding
an
affected
unit
and
whether
they
expect
to
operate
in
compliance.
The
owners
have
either
indicated
they
will
shut
down
or
install
the
appropriate
control
device,
but
no
follow­
up
has
taken
place
to
confirm
those
statements.
4
ttachment
3
Environmental
Benefit
able
3.1
Small
Business
Environmental
Improvement
Loans
Awarded
to
Dry
Cleaners
in
MN
1994
­
2003
Dry
to
Dry
Machines
28
Aqueous
Machines
4
Green
Earth
Machines
1
Total
33
Purchases
of
Perchloroethylene
by
Dry
Cleaners
in
MN
Dates
Fiscal
Year
gallons/
year
7/
1/
95­
6/
30/
96
1996
63,711.59
7/
1/
96­
6/
30/
97
1997
67,646.80
7/
1/
97­
6/
30/
98
1998
55,770.64
7/
1/
98­
6/
30/
99
1999
42,582.24
7/
1/
99­
6/
30/
00
2000
41,320.56
7/
1/
00­
6/
30/
01
2001
35,264.68
7/
1/
01­
6/
30/
02
2002
31,750.77
7/
1/
02­
6/
30/
03
2003
28,399.09
able
3.2
Small
Business
Environmental
Improvement
Loans
Awarded
to
Dry
Cleaners
in
MI
#
Loans
Perc
reduced
gal/
year
Dry
to
Dry
Machines
8
3955
Aqueous
Machines
1
30
Green
Earth
Machines
1
360
Total
10
4354
