Approval of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Clean Air Interstate Rule, 58542-58546 [E7-20165]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 16, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58542-58546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20165]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 97

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0405; FRL-8477-6]


Approval of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Clean Air Interstate 
Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving a 
revision to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on 
June 19, 2007. The Wisconsin SIP revision was proposed for partial 
approval and partial disapproval on July 30, 2007. No comments were 
received during the comment period for the proposal. This revision 
incorporates provisions related to the implementation of EPA's Clean 
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on May 12, 2005, and 
subsequently revised on April 28, 2006, and December 13, 2006, and the 
CAIR Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) which concerns sulfur dioxide 
(SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX) annual, and 
NOX ozone season emissions for the State of Wisconsin, 
promulgated on April 28, 2006, and subsequently revised December 13, 
2006. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is, to the 
extent EPA approves Wisconsin's SIP revision, amending the appropriate 
appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval.
    EPA is approving an abbreviated SIP revision that addresses the 
methodology to be used to allocate annual and ozone season 
NOX allowances under the CAIR FIP, except for allowances in 
the compliance supplement pool. The portions of Wisconsin's submittal 
(those associated with the compliance supplement pool and Superior 
Environmental Performance) that EPA is disapproving are inconsistent 
with CAIR and/or otherwise inappropriate to include in a CAIR SIP and 
must, therefore, be disapproved.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 16, 2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0405. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is 
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard 
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Douglas Aburano, 
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-6960, before visiting the Region 5 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Aburano, Environmental 
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6960, aburano.douglas@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?
II. Did Anyone Comment on the Proposed Partial Approval and Partial 
Disapproval?
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. Wisconsin's CAIR SIP Submittal
    A. Nature of Wisconsin's Submittal
    B. Summary of Wisconsin's Rules
    C. NOX Allowance Allocations
    D. Allocation of Allowances from the Compliance Supplement Pool 
(CSP)
    E. Individual Opt-in Units
    F. Additional Provision Found in Wisconsin's Abbreviated CAIR 
SIP Submittal
V. Correction of Typographical Error in Proposed Rule
VI. Final Action
VII. When Is This Action Effective?
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?

CAIR SIP Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval

    EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving a revision to 
Wisconsin's SIP, submitted on June 19, 2007, which modifies the 
application of certain provisions of the CAIR FIP concerning 
SO2, NOX annual and NOX ozone season 
emissions. (As discussed below, this less comprehensive CAIR SIP is 
termed an abbreviated SIP.) Wisconsin is subject to the CAIR FIP that 
implements the CAIR requirements by requiring certain EGUs to 
participate in the EPA-administered Federal CAIR SO2, 
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season cap-and-trade 
programs. The SIP revision provides a methodology for allocating 
NOX allowances for the NOX annual and 
NOX ozone season trading programs, instead of the Federal 
allocation methodology otherwise provided in the FIP. Consistent with 
the flexibility provided in the FIP, these provisions will be used to 
replace or supplement, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions in 
the CAIR FIP for Wisconsin. EPA is not making any changes to the CAIR 
FIP, but is, to the extent EPA approves Wisconsin's SIP revision, 
amending the appropriate appendices in the CAIR FIP trading rules 
simply to note that approval.
    EPA is disapproving certain separable provisions of Wisconsin's 
submittal. These provisions include NR 432.04 ``compliance supplement 
pool'' and NR 432.08 ``superior environmental performance.'' NR 432.04 
includes provisions that are inconsistent with CAIR. NR 432.08 would 
allow sources to make voluntary reductions beyond state and Federal 
requirements in exchange for regulatory flexibility.
    NR 432.04 contains the provisions Wisconsin has adopted for 
distribution of the CSP. Consistent with the flexibility given to 
states in the FIP, Wisconsin has chosen to modify the provisions of the 
CAIR NOX annual FIP concerning the allocation of allowances 
from the CSP. Wisconsin has chosen to distribute CSP allowances based 
on early reduction credits or based on the need to avoid undue risk to 
electric reliability. The first methodology based on early reduction 
credits essentially mirrors the FIP's early reduction credit 
methodology.
    The description in Wisconsin's rule of the second methodology based 
on need is somewhat unclear. EPA interprets the provision to require a 
demonstration that a unit cannot avoid undue risk to electric 
reliability if it keeps its emissions in 2009 from exceeding its 2009 
allowance allocation. Even if the unit could obtain additional 
allowances to cover emissions above its allocation, and thereby comply 
with the requirement to hold allowances covering emissions, the unit 
would still be eligible for CSP allowances. In contrast, EPA's CSP 
provisions in the model rule, the FIP, and CAIR require a demonstration 
that, without being given CSP allowances, a unit cannot avoid undue 
risk while keeping its 2009 emissions from exceeding all the allowances 
it holds, both its 2009 allowance allocations and other allowances it 
can obtain for compliance. Thus, Wisconsin's provision is inconsistent 
with EPA's CSP provisions. Moreover, since Wisconsin's entire CSP

[[Page 58543]]

is available for units meeting either the early reduction credit or the 
undue risk criteria, the early reduction credit and undue risk 
provisions cannot be administered separately, and the Wisconsin CSP 
must be administered by a single agency. Consequently, EPA is 
disapproving all of Wisconsin's CSP provisions. This portion of 
Wisconsin's SIP submittal is separable from the rest of the submittal 
and can be disapproved without compromising the integrity of the 
portions we are approving.
    NR 432.08 would grant regulatory flexibility to sources that 
voluntarily reduce emissions beyond what is required under state and 
Federal regulations. The scope of regulatory flexibility provided by NR 
432.08 is ambiguous. To the extent this flexibility relates to state-
only regulatory requirements, the regulatory provisions are not 
appropriately included in a SIP. To the extent this flexibility relates 
to Federal requirements reflected in state regulations, this type of 
flexibility is not allowed under CAIR, and it is inappropriate to 
simply assume that other Federal requirements allow such flexibility. 
Therefore, the regulatory flexibility provisions cannot be included in 
Wisconsin's CAIR abbreviated SIP revision and cannot be approved.

II. Did Anyone Comment on the Proposed Partial Approval and Partial 
Disapproval?

    No comments were received during the 30-day comment period on the 
proposed partial approval and partial disapproval that was published on 
July 30, 2007.

III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR establishes statewide emission budgets for SO2 and 
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase 
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014, 
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and 
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both 
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues 
thereafter. CAIR requires states to implement the budgets by either: 
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade 
programs; or, (2) adopting other control measures of the state's 
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in 
compliance with the applicable state SO2 and NOX 
budgets.
    The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR rules provide model 
rules that states must adopt (with certain limited changes, if 
desired), if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading 
programs. With two exceptions, only states that choose to meet the 
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are 
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One 
exception is for states that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model 
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered 
trading programs. The other exception is for states that include all 
non-EGUs from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their 
CAIR NOX ozone season trading programs.

IV. Wisconsin's CAIR SIP Submittal

A. Nature of Wisconsin's Submittal

    On June 19, 2007, Wisconsin submitted a request to process their 
rules for addressing CAIR requirements. The rules became effective at 
the state level on August 1, 2007. The Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources (WDNR) held hearings on these proposed rules on October 10 
and October 12, 2006. The 30-day public comment period for the proposed 
rules ended on October 23, 2006.

B. Summary of Wisconsin's Rules

    The WDNR submitted Chapter NR 432 of the Wisconsin Administrative 
Code Chapters Related to Air Pollution Control, entitled ``Allocation 
of Clean Air Interstate Rule NOX Allowances'' for inclusion 
in the Wisconsin SIP. These rules are designed to address the 
requirements of the CAIR.
    Chapter NR 432 includes eight subparts:

1. NR 432.01 Applicability; purpose
2. NR 432.02 Definitions
3. NR 432.03 CAIR NOX allowance allocation
4. NR 432.04 Compliance supplement pool
5. NR 432.05 CAIR NOX ozone season allowance allocation
6. NR 432.06 Timing requirements for allocations of CAIR NOX 
allowances and CAIR NOX ozone season allowances
7. NR 432.07 CAIR renewable units
8. NR 432.08 Superior environmental performance

A detailed description of the rule and its subparts can be found in the 
proposed partial approval/partial disapproval published in the Federal 
Register on July 30, 2007 (72 FR 41669).

C. NOX Allowance Allocations

    The CAIR FIP provides States the flexibility to establish a 
different NOX allowance allocation methodology that will be 
used to allocate allowances to sources in the States if certain 
requirements are met. These requirements relate to the timing of 
submission of units, allocations to the Administrator for recordation 
and the total amount of allowances allocated for each control period. 
In adopting alternative NOX allowance allocation 
methodologies, States have flexibility with regard to:
    1. The cost to recipients of the allowances, which may be 
distributed for free or auctioned;
    2. The frequency of allocations;
    3. The basis for allocating allowances, which may be distributed, 
for example, based on historical heat input or electric and thermal 
output; and
    4. The use of allowance set-asides and, if used, their size.
    Subchapter NR 432.01 entitled, ``Applicability; purpose'' 
consolidates the applicability and purpose section for both the annual 
and ozone season trading programs. While the FIP already contains an 
applicability section, the state is required to adopt this section to 
satisfy its own rulemaking requirements. Wisconsin is adopting the 
applicability section to apply only to the allocation methodology in 
their rule but this does not affect the applicability of the CAIR FIP.
    Subchapter NR 432.02 entitled, ``Definitions'' adopts many of the 
CAIR FIP definitions but is rewritten in a format to conform to the 
state's regulatory writing style requirements. While the FIP already 
contains a definitions section, the state is required to adopt this 
section to satisfy its own rulemaking requirements. Wisconsin is 
adopting the definition section to apply only to the allocation 
methodology in their rule but this does not affect the applicability of 
the CAIR FIP. Additionally, WDNR has added definitions not found in the 
CAIR FIP. These definitions are included to address the fact that 
Wisconsin's rule allocates allowances to renewable energy sources, 
which the FIP does not do, and to address the fact that Wisconsin 
allocates allowances to emitting sources based on energy output rather 
than heat input. The CAIR FIP uses a heat input based allocation 
methodology.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to states in the CAIR FIP, 
Wisconsin has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR 
NOX annual FIP concerning the allocation of NOX 
annual allowances with its own methodology. NR 432.03 contains the 
provisions for the NOX annual allowance distribution 
methodology Wisconsin has adopted. Wisconsin has chosen to distribute 
NOX annual allowances based upon gross electrical output. 
The CAIR FIP

[[Page 58544]]

allocates allowances to NOX emitting sources only, and 
issues allowances on a fuel-weighted basis. Wisconsin's rule utilizes a 
different approach, which allocates allowances to renewable energy 
units, as well as NOX emitting sources, and does not issue 
allowances on a fuel-weighted basis. For units that have operated for 
five or more consecutive years, allocations are determined based on the 
unit's three highest annual gross electrical outputs. Wisconsin has 
created a new unit set-aside for sources that have fewer than five 
years of operating data. The new unit set-aside is equal to seven 
percent of the number of NOX annual allocations that new 
unit can request from the new unit set-aside and is limited by the 
number of the unit's total tons of NOX emissions during the 
calendar year immediately preceding the calendar year of the request. 
Updating of unit baselines for allocation purposes occurs every five 
years beginning in 2011. The initial allocation of allowances for the 
years 2009-2014 is set forth in NR 432.03.
    In a similar manner, Wisconsin has developed an ozone season 
NOX budget consistent with the flexibility given to states 
in the CAIR FIP. Wisconsin has chosen to replace the provisions of the 
CAIR NOX ozone season FIP concerning the allocation of 
NOX annual allowances with its own methodology. NR 432.05 
contains the provisions for the NOX ozone season allowance 
distribution methodology that Wisconsin has adopted. Wisconsin has 
chosen to distribute NOX ozone season allowances based upon 
gross electrical output. The CAIR FIP allocates allowances to 
NOX emitting sources only, and issues allowances on a fuel-
weighted basis. Wisconsin's rule uses a different approach, which 
allocates allowances to renewable energy units, as well as 
NOX emitting sources, and does not issue allowances on a 
fuel-weighted basis. Under Wisconsin's rule, the three highest ozone 
season amounts of the unit's gross electrical output will be the basis 
for determining that unit's allocations for units that have operated 
for five or more consecutive years. Additionally, Wisconsin has created 
a new unit set-aside for sources that have fewer than five years of 
operating data. The new unit set-aside is equal to seven percent of the 
total trading budget. The number of NOX ozone season 
allocations that a new unit can request from the new unit set-aside is 
limited by the number of that unit's total tons of NOX 
emissions during the ozone season preceding the calendar year of the 
request. Updating of unit baselines for allocation purposes occurs 
every five years beginning in 2011. The initial allocation of 
allowances for the years 2009-2014 is set forth in NR 432.05.
    NR 432.06 describes the timing requirements for allocating both 
NOX annual allowances and NOX ozone season 
allowances. These requirements are consistent with the timing 
requirements for allocating allowances under an abbreviated SIP 
scenario found in 40 CFR 51.123 and are, therefore, being approved.
    Since Wisconsin has chosen to allocate both NOX annual 
and NOX ozone season allowances to renewable energy units, 
the state has adopted provisions specifically for these sources. These 
provisions are found in NR 432.07 which requires renewable units to 
comply with the same trading requirements that apply to the regulated 
EGUs, such as designating an account representative who represents the 
unit in any trading activity, establishing accounts for the 
NOX trading programs, and the process for requesting 
NOX allowances.

D. Allocation of NOX Allowances From the Compliance 
Supplement Pool (CSP)

    The CSP provides an incentive for early reductions in 
NOX annual emissions. The CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR 
NOX annual allowances for 2009 for the entire CAIR region, 
and a state's share of the CSP is based upon the state's share of the 
projected emission reductions under CAIR. States may distribute CSP 
allowances, one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to sources 
that make NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond what is 
required by any applicable state or Federal emission limitation. States 
also may distribute CSP allowances based upon a demonstration of need 
for an extension of the 2009 deadline for implementing emission 
controls.
    The CAIR NOX annual FIP establishes specific 
methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may choose an 
allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to allocate 
CSP allowances to sources in those states. See 40 CFR 51.123(p)(2) 
(requiring that State CSP provisions be consistent with the model rule 
at 40 CFR 96.143, the FIP at 40 CFR 97.143, or CAIR at 40 CFR 
51.123(e)(4)).
    Consistent with the flexibility given to states in the FIP, 
Wisconsin has chosen to modify the provisions of the CAIR 
NOX annual FIP concerning the allocation of allowances from 
the CSP. NR 432.04 contains the provisions Wisconsin has adopted for 
distribution of the CSP. Wisconsin has chosen to distribute CSP 
allowances based on early reduction credits or based on the need to 
avoid undue risk to electric reliability. The first methodology based 
on early reduction credits essentially mirrors the FIP's early 
reduction credit methodology.
    The description in Wisconsin's rule of the second methodology based 
on need is somewhat unclear. EPA interprets the provision to require a 
demonstration that a unit cannot avoid undue risk to electric 
reliability if it keeps its emissions in 2009 from exceeding its 2009 
allowance allocation. Even if the unit could obtain additional 
allowances to cover emissions above its allocation, and thereby comply 
with the requirement to hold allowances covering emissions, the unit 
could be given CSP allowances. In contrast, EPA's CSP provisions in the 
model rule, the FIP, and CAIR require a demonstration that, without 
being given CSP allowances, a unit cannot avoid undue risk while 
keeping its 2009 emissions from exceeding all the allowances it holds, 
both its 2009 allowance allocations and other allowances it can obtain 
for compliance. Thus, Wisconsin's provision is inconsistent with EPA's 
CSP provisions. Moreover, since Wisconsin's entire CSP is available for 
units meeting either the early reduction credit or the undue risk 
criteria, the early reduction credit and undue risk provisions cannot 
be administered separately, and the Wisconsin CSP must be administered 
by a single agency. Consequently, EPA is disapproving all of 
Wisconsin's CSP provisions. This portion of Wisconsin's SIP submittal 
is separable from the rest of the submittal and can be disapproved 
without compromising the integrity of the portions we are approving.
    In the absence of approved CSP provisions in an abbreviated CAIR 
SIP, the FIP provisions for the allocation of CSP allowances continue 
to apply in Wisconsin.

E. Individual Opt-in Units

    The opt-in provisions allow for certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers, 
combustion turbines, and other stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices) 
that do not meet the applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program 
to participate voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading 
program. A non-EGU may opt into one or more of the CAIR trading 
programs. In order to qualify to opt into a CAIR trading program, a 
unit must vent all emissions through a stack and be able to meet 
monitoring, recordkeeping, and recording requirements of 40 CFR part 
75. The owners and operators seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading 
program must

[[Page 58545]]

apply for a CAIR opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in 
permit, the unit becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must 
meet the same allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting 
requirements as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The 
opt-in provisions provide for two methodologies for allocating 
allowances for opt-in units, one methodology that applies to opt-in 
units in general and a second methodology that allocates allowances 
only to opt-in units that the owners and operators intend to repower 
before January 1, 2015.
    States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions. The 
rules for each of the CAIR FIP trading programs include opt-in 
provisions that are essentially the same as those in the respective 
CAIR SIP model rules, except that the CAIR FIP opt-in provisions become 
effective in a state only if the state's abbreviated SIP revision 
adopts the opt-in provisions. The state may adopt the opt-in provisions 
entirely or may adopt them but exclude one of the allowance allocation 
methodologies. The state also has the option of not adopting any opt-in 
provisions in the abbreviated SIP revision and thereby providing for 
the CAIR FIP trading program to be implemented in the state without the 
ability for units to opt into the program.
    Consistent with the flexibility given to states in the FIP, 
Wisconsin has chosen not to allow non-EGUs meeting certain requirements 
to participate in the CAIR NOX annual trading program, the 
CAIR NOX ozone season trading program, or the CAIR SO2 
trading program.

F. Additional Provision Found in Wisconsin's Abbreviated CAIR SIP 
Submittal

    There is an additional provision that Wisconsin has submitted as 
part of the abbreviated CAIR SIP.
    NR 432.08 would allow sources to make voluntary reductions beyond 
state and Federal requirements in exchange for regulatory flexibility. 
For the reasons discussed above, we are disapproving this portion of 
Wisconsin's CAIR abbreviated SIP. This portion is separable from the 
rest of Wisconsin's SIP submittal and can be disapproved without 
compromising the integrity of the portions we are approving.

V. Correction of Typographical Error in Proposed Rule

    We would like to point out a typographical error in the proposed 
partial approval/partial disapproval published on July 31, 2007 (72 FR 
41669). In section, V. Analysis of Wisconsin's CAIR SIP Submittal, 
subsection C. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations, we stated, ``The 
CAIR FIP established the budgets for Wisconsin as * * * 17,987 tons for 
NOX ozone season emissions for 2010-2014 * * *'' We are 
correcting this to read, ``The CAIR FIP established the budgets for 
Wisconsin as * * * 17,987 tons for NOX ozone season 
emissions for 2009-2014 * * *'' As stated earlier in that same 
subsection NOX budgets, both seasonal and annual, were 
developed for the 2009-2014 period.

VI. Final Action

    EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving Wisconsin's 
abbreviated CAIR SIP revision submitted on June 19, 2007. Wisconsin is 
covered by the CAIR FIP, which requires participation in the EPA-
administered CAIR FIP cap-and-trade programs for SO2, 
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season emissions. Under 
this abbreviated SIP revision and consistent with the flexibility given 
to states in the FIP, Wisconsin has adopted provisions for allocating 
allowances under the CAIR FIP NOX annual and NOX 
ozone season trading programs. As provided for in the CAIR FIP, these 
provisions in the abbreviated SIP revision will replace or supplement 
the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIP in Wisconsin. These 
provisions in Wisconsin's abbreviated SIP revision meet the applicable 
requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(p) and (ee), with regard to 
NOX annual and NOX ozone season emissions. EPA is 
not making any changes to the CAIR FIP, but is, to the extent EPA 
approves Wisconsin's SIP revision, amending the appropriate appendices 
in the CAIR FIP trading rules simply to note that approval.
    Wisconsin's submittal also contains provisions that are 
inconsistent with requirements concerning the CSP and that grant 
unacceptable regulatory flexibility to some sources. EPA is 
disapproving these portions of Wisconsin's rule. We are able to 
disapprove these specific portions of Wisconsin's submittal because 
they are separable from the rest of Wisconsin's submittal and 
disapproving only these parts has no effect on the rest of the 
submittal that we are approving.

VII. When Is This Action Effective?

    EPA finds that there is good cause for this approval to become 
effective on October 16, 2007, because a delayed effective date is 
unnecessary due to the nature of the approval, which allows the State 
to make allocations under its CAIR rules. The expedited effective date 
for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which 
provides that rule actions may become effective less than 30 days after 
publication if the rule ``grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves 
a restriction'' and section 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), which allows an 
effective date less than 30 days after publication ``as otherwise 
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the 
rule.''
    CAIR SIP approvals relieve states and CAIR sources within states 
from being subject to allowance allocation provisions in the CAIR FIPs 
that otherwise would apply to it, allowing States to make their own 
allowance allocations based on their SIP-approved State rule. The 
relief from these obligations is sufficient reason to allow an 
expedited effective date of this rule under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). In 
addition, Wisconsin's relief from these obligations provides good cause 
to make this rule effective October 16, 2007, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in 5 
U.S.C. 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust 
their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Where, 
as here, the final rule relieves obligations rather than imposes 
obligations, affected parties, such as the State of Wisconsin and CAIR 
sources within the State, do not need time to adjust and prepare before 
the rule takes effect.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is 
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and would 
impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this action approves pre-existing requirements under state law and 
would not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required 
by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

[[Page 58546]]

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it would 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it would not have substantial direct effects on 
the States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule 
implementing a Federal standard and amends the appropriate appendices 
in the CAIR FIP trading rules to note that approval. It does not alter 
the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because 
it would approve a State rule implementing a Federal Standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule would not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric 
utilities, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

40 CFR Part 97

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric 
utilities, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 
dioxide.

    Dated: September 21, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart YY--Wisconsin

0
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(116) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (116) A revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) was 
submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on June 19, 
2007. This revision consists of regulations to meet the requirements of 
the Clean Air Interstate Rule.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. The following sections of the 
Wisconsin Administrative Code are incorporated by reference: NR 432.01 
``Applicability; purpose''; NR 432.02 ``Definitions''; NR 432.03 ``CAIR 
NOX allowance allocation''; NR 432.05 ``CAIR NOX 
ozone season allowance allocation''; NR 432.06 ``Timing requirements 
for allocations of CAIR NOX allowances and CAIR 
NOX ozone season allowances''; and NR 432.07 ``CAIR 
renewable units'', as created and published in the (Wisconsin) 
Register, July, 2007, No. 619, effective August 1, 2007.
* * * * *

0
40 CFR part 97 is amended as follows:

PART 97--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7403, 7410, 7426, 7601, and 7651, et 
seq.


0
4. Appendix A to Subpart EE is amended by adding the entry for 
Wisconsin in alphabetical order under paragraph 1. to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart EE of Part 97--States With Approved State 
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations

* * * * *
    1. * * *
Wisconsin
* * * * *


0
5. Appendix A to Subpart EEEE is amended by adding the entry for 
``Wisconsin'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart EEEE of Part 97--States With Approved State 
Implementation Plan Revisions Concerning Allocations

* * * * *
Wisconsin
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-20165 Filed 10-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P