Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 21685-21691 [2015-09051]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 75 (Monday, April 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21685-21691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09051]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0704; FRL-9926-33-Region 5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 2010 
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve some elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions 
from Wisconsin regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide 
(NO2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements 
are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's 
air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's 
responsibilities under the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 20, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2014-0704, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and 
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and 
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal 
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for 
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2014-0704. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment 
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the 
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 
include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in 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 Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, 
at (312) 353-4489 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, 
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489, 
svingen.eric@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific 
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.

[[Page 21686]]

    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.

II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?

A. What state submissions does this rulemaking address?

    This rulemaking addresses June 20, 2013, submissions and a January 
28, 2015, clarification from the Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources (WDNR) intended to address all applicable infrastructure 
requirements for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 
SO2 NAAQS.

B. Why did the state make these SIP submissions?

    Under section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to 
submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their SIPs provide for 
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 
These submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the 
applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications 
that their existing SIPs for the NAAQS already meet those requirements.
    EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, 
guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under 
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and 
PM2.5\1\ National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 
Guidance) and has issued additional guidance documents, the most recent 
on September 13, 2013, entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and 
(2)'' (2013 Guidance). The SIP submissions referenced in this 
rulemaking pertain to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1) 
and (2), and address the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ PM2.5 refers to particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers, oftentimes 
referred to as ``fine'' particles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from Wisconsin that address 
the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) for 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. The 
requirement for states to make SIP submissions of this type arises out 
of CAA section 110(a)(1), which states that states must make SIP 
submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the 
Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national 
primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and 
these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation, 
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly 
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the 
requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's 
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. 
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach 
such plan'' submission must address.
    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the 
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) 
as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term 
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to 
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions 
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such 
as SIP submissions that address the nonattainment planning requirements 
of part D and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 
requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, and ``regional haze SIP'' 
submissions required to address the visibility protection requirements 
of CAA section 169A.
    This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not 
integral to acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submissions: (i) 
Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of 
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction (``SSM'') at sources, that may be 
contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess 
emissions; (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' 
or ``director's discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP 
approved emissions limits with limited public notice or without 
requiring further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA; 
and, (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be 
inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement 
Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 
(June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA has the authority to 
address each one of these substantive areas in separate rulemakings. A 
detailed history, interpretation, and rationale as they relate to 
infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's May 13, 2014, 
proposed rule entitled, ``Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 
Lead NAAQS'' in the section, ``What is the scope of this rulemaking?'' 
(see 79 FR 27241 at 27242-27245).

III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?

    EPA's guidance for these infrastructure SIP submissions is embodied 
in the 2007 Guidance referenced above. Specifically, attachment A of 
the 2007 Guidance (Required Section 110 SIP Elements) identifies the 
statutory elements that states need to submit in order to satisfy the 
requirements for an infrastructure SIP submission. As discussed above, 
EPA issued additional guidance, the most recent being the 2013 Guidance 
that further clarifies aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not 
NAAQS specific.

IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?

    Pursuant to section 110(a), states must provide reasonable notice 
and opportunity for public hearing for all infrastructure SIP 
submissions. WDNR provided notice of a public comment period on May 1, 
2013, held a public hearing at WDNR State Headquarters on June 10, 
2013, and closed the public comment period on June 14, 2013. Two 
comments were received, expressing support for improved environmental 
protection and air quality.
    Wisconsin provided a detailed synopsis of how various components of 
its SIP meet each of the applicable requirements in section 110(a)(2) 
for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 
as applicable. The following review evaluates the state's submissions.

A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control Measures

    This section requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits 
and other control measures, means or techniques, schedules for 
compliance, and other related matters. However, EPA has long 
interpreted emission limits and control measures for attaining the 
standards as being due when nonattainment planning requirements are 
due.\2\ In the context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating 
the existing SIP provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only 
evaluating whether the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for 
the implementation of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g., EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards for Lead.'' 73 FR 66964 at 67034.

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

[[Page 21687]]

    Under Wisconsin Statutes (Wis. Stats.) 227 and 285, WDNR holds the 
authority to create new rules and implement existing emission limits 
and controls. Authority to monitor, update, and implement revisions to 
Wisconsin's SIP, including revisions to emission limits and control 
measures as necessary to meet NAAQS, is contained in Wis. Stats. 
285.11-285.19. Authority related to specific pollutants, including the 
establishment of ambient air quality standards and increments, 
identification of nonattainment areas, air resource allocations, and 
performance and emissions standards, is contained in Wis. Stats. 
285.21-285.29.
    Specifically, authority for WNDR to create new rules and 
regulations is found in Wis. Stats. 227.11, 285.11, and 285.21. Wis. 
Stats. 227.11(2)(a) expressly confers rule making authority to an 
agency. Wis. Stats. 285.11(1) and (6) require that WDNR promulgate 
rules and establish control strategies in order to prepare and 
implement the SIP for the prevention, abatement, and control of air 
pollution in Wisconsin.
    The 2013 Guidance states that to satisfy section 110(a)(2)(A) 
requirements, ``an air agency's submission should identify existing 
EPA-approved SIP provisions or new SIP provisions that the air agency 
has adopted and submitted for EPA approval that limit emissions of 
pollutants relevant to the subject NAAQS, including precursors of the 
relevant NAAQS pollutant where applicable.'' In its January 28, 2015, 
clarification letter, WDNR identified existing controls and emission 
limits in the Wisconsin Administrative Code that can be applied to the 
2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. These 
regulations include controls and emission limits for volatile organic 
compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), which are 
precursors to ozone. VOC as an ozone precursor is controlled by 
Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Natural Resources (NR) 419-425, 
and NOX as an ozone precursor is controlled by NR 428; these 
regulations can be applied to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. NR 428 contains 
existing controls and emission limits for NOX; these 
regulations can be applied to the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. NR 418 
contains existing controls and emission limits for SO2; 
these regulations can be applied to the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
    In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve any new 
provisions in NR 419-425, NR 428, or NR 418 that have not been 
previously approved by EPA. EPA is also not proposing to approve or 
disapprove any existing state provisions or rules related to start-up, 
shutdown or malfunction or director's discretion in the context of 
section 110(a)(2)(A). EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) with respect to 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System

    This section requires SIPs to include provisions to provide for 
establishing and operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and 
analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to 
EPA upon request. This review of the annual monitoring plan includes 
EPA's determination that the state: (i) Monitors air quality at 
appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-approved Federal 
Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method monitors; (ii) submits 
data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner; and, (iii) 
provides EPA Regional Offices with prior notification of any planned 
changes to monitoring sites or the network plan.
    WDNR continues to operate an extensive air monitoring network, 
which is used to determine compliance with the NAAQS. Furthermore, WDNR 
submits yearly monitoring network plans to EPA, and EPA approved WDNR's 
Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for ozone, NO2, and 
SO2 on October 31, 2014. Monitoring data from WDNR are 
entered into EPA's AQS in a timely manner, and the state provides EPA 
with prior notification when changes to its monitoring network or plan 
are being considered. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures; 
PSD

    This section requires each state to provide a program for 
enforcement of control measures. Section 110(a)(2)(C) also includes 
various requirements relating to PSD.
1. Program for Enforcement of Control Measures
    States are required to include a program providing for enforcement 
of all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or 
modified stationary sources to meet new source review (NSR) 
requirements under PSD and nonattainment new source review (NNSR) 
programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-169B) addresses PSD, while 
part D of the CAA (sections 171-193) addresses NNSR requirements.
    WDNR maintains an enforcement program to ensure compliance with SIP 
requirements. The Bureau of Air Management houses an active statewide 
compliance and enforcement team that works in all geographic regions of 
the state. WDNR refers actions as necessary to the Wisconsin Department 
of Justice with the involvement of WDNR. Under Wis. Stats. 285.13, WDNR 
has the authority to impose fees and penalties to ensure that required 
measures are ultimately implemented. Wis. Stats. 285.83 and Wis. Stats. 
285.87 provide WDNR with the authority to enforce violations and assess 
penalties. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the enforcement of SIP 
measures requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2008 
ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
2. PSD
    110(a)(2)(C) includes various PSD requirements: Identification of 
NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions in the PSD program, 
identification of precursors to PM2.5 and the identification 
of PM2.5 and PM10 \3\ condensables in the PSD 
program, PM2.5 increments in the PSD program, and greenhouse 
gas (GHG) permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule.'' \4\ In this 
rulemaking, we are not taking action on the state's satisfaction of the 
various PSD permitting requirements. Instead, EPA will evaluate 
Wisconsin's compliance with each of these requirements in a separate 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ PM10 refers to particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers.
    \4\ In EPA's April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking for 
infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, 
we stated that each state's PSD program must meet applicable 
requirements for evaluation of all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD 
permits (see 76 FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in 
EPA's August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for infrastructure SIPs 
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 45992 at 45998). In 
other words, if a state lacks provisions needed to adequately 
address NOX as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5 
precursors, PM2.5 and PM10 condensables, 
PM2.5 increments, or the Federal GHG permitting 
thresholds, the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a 
suitable PSD permitting program must be considered not to have been 
met irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the requirement to 
submit an infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport; Pollution Abatement

    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs to include provisions 
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state 
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with 
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 
requires SIPs to

[[Page 21688]]

include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions 
activity in one state from interfering with measures required to 
prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect 
visibility in another state.
1. Interstate Transport--Significant Contribution
    On February 17, 2012, EPA promulgated designations for the 2010 
NO2 NAAQS, stating for the entire country that, ``The EPA is 
designating areas as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' to mean that 
available information does not indicate that the air quality in these 
areas exceeds the 2010 NO2 NAAQS'' (see 77 FR 9532). For 
comparison purposes, EPA examined the design values \5\ based on data 
collected between 2011 and 2013 from NO2 monitors in 
Wisconsin and surrounding states. Within Wisconsin, the highest design 
value was 49 ppb at a monitor in Milwaukee. In surrounding states, the 
highest design value was 64 ppb at a monitor in Chicago, IL. These 
design values are both lower than the standard, which is 100 ppb for 
the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Additionally, as discussed in EPA's 
evaluation of 110(a)(2)(A) requirements, NR 428 contains controls and 
emission limits for NOX. Furthermore, NR 432 allows 
Wisconsin to implement the state portions of the Clean Air Interstate 
Rule (CAIR), which addresses emissions of NOX as well as 
SO2. On January 1, 2015, CAIR was replaced by the Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which requires reductions of 
NOX and SO2 emissions in order to reduce 
interstate transport. WDNR works with EPA in implementing this program. 
EPA believes that, in conjunction with the continued implementation of 
the state's ability to limit NOX emissions, low monitored 
values of NO2 will continue in and around Wisconsin. In 
other words, NO2 emissions from Wisconsin are not expected 
to cause or contribute to a violation of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 
in another state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The level of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS is 100 parts per 
billion (ppb) and the form is the 3-year average of the annual 98th 
percentile of the daily 1-hour maximum. For the most recent design 
values, see https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this rulemaking, EPA is not evaluating section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements relating to significant contribution to 
transport for the 2008 ozone and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Instead, 
EPA will evaluate these requirements in a separate rulemaking. EPA 
proposes that Wisconsin has met the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
requirements relating to significant contribution to transport for the 
2010 NO2 NAAQS.
2. Interstate Transport--Interfere With Maintenance
    As described above, EPA has classified all areas of the country as 
``unclassifiable/attainment'' for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 
NO2 design values in and around Wisconsin are lower than the 
standard, WDNR is able to control NO2 emissions, and CSAPR 
requires reductions in NOX emissions. In other words, 
NO2 emissions from Wisconsin are not expected to interfere 
with the maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in another state.
    In this rulemaking, EPA is not evaluating section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements relating to interference with 
maintenance for the 2008 ozone and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Instead, 
EPA will evaluate these requirements in a separate rulemaking. EPA 
proposes that Wisconsin has met the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
requirements relating to interference with maintenance for the 2010 
NO2 NAAQS.
3. Interstate Transport--Prevention of Significant Deterioration
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions 
prohibiting interference with PSD. In this rulemaking, we are not 
taking action on the state's satisfaction of PSD requirements. Instead, 
EPA will evaluate Wisconsin's compliance with PSD requirements in a 
separate rulemaking.
4. Interstate Transport--Protect Visibility
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility 
protection of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to 
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the 
CAA (which includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2013 Guidance states 
that these requirements can be satisfied by an approved SIP addressing 
reasonably attributable visibility impairment, if required, or an 
approved SIP addressing regional haze.
    On August 7, 2012, EPA published its final approval of Wisconsin's 
regional haze plan (see 77 FR 46952). Therefore, EPA is proposing that 
Wisconsin has met the visibility protection requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 
SO2 NAAQS.
5. Interstate and International Pollution Abatement
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each SIP to contain adequate 
provisions requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of 
section 126 and section 115 of the CAA (relating to interstate and 
international pollution abatement, respectively).
    Section 126(a) requires new or modified sources to notify 
neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. The statute 
does not specify the method by which the source should provide the 
notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs must have a 
provision requiring such notification by new or modified sources. A 
lack of such a requirement in state rules would be grounds for 
disapproval of this element.
    Wisconsin has provisions in its EPA-approved PSD program requiring 
new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential 
negative air quality impacts. Wisconsin's submissions reference these 
provisions as being adequate to meet the requirements of section 
126(a). EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section 126(a) with 
respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 
NAAQS.
    The submissions from Wisconsin affirm that the state has no pending 
obligations under section 115. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to 
section 115 with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 
2010 SO2 NAAQS.

E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Authority and Resources

    This section requires each state to provide for adequate personnel, 
funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP, and 
related issues. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) also requires each state to 
comply with the requirements respecting state boards under section 128.
1. Adequate Resources
    Wisconsin's biennial budget ensures that EPA grant funds as well as 
state funding appropriations are sufficient to administer its air 
quality management program, and WDNR has routinely demonstrated that it 
retains adequate personnel to administer its air quality management 
program. Wisconsin's Environmental Performance Partnership Agreement 
with EPA documents certain funding and personnel levels at WDNR. As 
discussed in previous sections, basic duties and authorities in the 
state are outlined in Wis. Stats. 285.11. EPA proposes that Wisconsin 
has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 
110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 
2010 SO2 NAAQS.

[[Page 21689]]

2. State Board Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2)(E) also requires each SIP to contain provisions 
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the 
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (i) That any 
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this 
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the 
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their 
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under 
this chapter, and (ii) that any potential conflicts of interest by 
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with 
similar powers be adequately disclosed.
    In today's action, EPA is neither proposing to approve nor 
disapprove the portions of the submissions from Wisconsin intended to 
address the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 
Instead, EPA will take separate action on compliance with section 
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the state at a later time. EPA is working with 
WDNR to address these requirements in the most appropriate way.

F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System

    States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary 
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also 
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, 
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators 
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state 
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of 
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation 
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or 
standards established pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the reports 
shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.
    WDNR requires regulated sources to submit various reports, 
dependent on applicable requirements and the type of permit issued, to 
the Bureau of Air Management Compliance Team. The frequency and 
requirements for report review are incorporated as part of NR 438 and 
NR 439. Additionally, WDNR routinely submits quality assured analyses 
and data obtained from its stationary source monitoring system for 
review and publication by EPA. Basic authority for Wisconsin's 
Federally mandated Compliance Assurance Monitoring reporting structure 
is provided in Wis. Stats. 285.65. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met 
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with 
respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 
NAAQS.

G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Power

    This section requires that a plan provide for authority that is 
analogous to what is provided in section 303 of the CAA, and adequate 
contingency plans to implement such authority. The 2013 Guidance states 
that infrastructure SIP submissions should specify authority, rested in 
an appropriate official, to restrain any source from causing or 
contributing to emissions which present an imminent and substantial 
endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment.
    Wis. Stats. 285.85 provides the requirement for WDNR to act upon a 
finding that an emergency episode or condition exists. The language 
contained in this chapter authorizes WDNR to seek immediate injunctive 
relief in circumstances of substantial danger to the environment or to 
public health. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the applicable 
infrastructure SIP requirements for this portion of section 
110(a)(2)(G) with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 
2010 SO2 NAAQS.

H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions

    This section requires states to have the authority to revise their 
SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved 
methods for attaining the NAAQS, or to an EPA finding that the SIP is 
substantially inadequate.
    Wis. Stats. 285.11(6) provides WDNR with the authority to develop 
all rules, limits, and regulations necessary to meet the NAAQS as they 
evolve, and to respond to any EPA findings of inadequacy with the 
overall Wisconsin SIP and air management programs. EPA proposes that 
Wisconsin has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(H) with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 
2010 SO2 NAAQS.

I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Planning Requirements of Part D

    The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area 
designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of 
part D of the CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment areas.
    EPA has determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to 
the infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D 
attainment plans through separate processes.

J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public 
Notification; PSD; Visibility Protection

    The evaluation of the submissions from Wisconsin with respect to 
the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are described below.
1. Consultation With Government Officials
    States must provide a process for consultation with local 
governments and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS 
implementation requirements.
    Wis. Stats. 285.13(5) contains the provisions for WDNR to advise, 
consult, contract, and cooperate with other agencies of the state and 
local governments, industries, other states, interstate or inter-local 
agencies, the Federal government, and interested persons or groups 
during the entire process of SIP revision development and 
implementation and for other elements regarding air management for 
which WDNR is the officially charged agency. WDNR's Bureau of Air 
Management has effectively used formal stakeholder structures in the 
development and refinement of all SIP revisions. Additionally, 
Wisconsin is an active member of the Lake Michigan Air Directors 
Consortium (LADCO), which provides technical assessments and a forum 
for discussion regarding air quality issues to member states. EPA 
proposes that Wisconsin has satisfied the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
2. Public Notification
    Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires states to notify the public if 
NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance public awareness of 
measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances. WDNR maintains 
portions of its Web site specifically for issues related to the 2008 
ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.\6\ 
Information related to monitoring sites is found on Wisconsin's Web 
site, as is the calendar for all public events and public hearings held 
in the state. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the infrastructure 
SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect 
to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/Pollutants.html.

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

[[Page 21690]]

3. PSD
    States must meet applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) 
related to PSD. Wisconsin's PSD program in the context of 
infrastructure SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs 
addressing section 110(a)(2)(C) and (a)(2)(D)(i)(II). EPA will evaluate 
Wisconsin's compliance with the various PSD and GHG infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) in a separate rulemaking.
4. Visibility Protection
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility 
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program 
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and 
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, the visibility 
and regional haze program requirements under part C do not change. 
Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation ``triggered'' 
under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. However, 
as EPA discussed above in section D, Wisconsin has a fully approved 
regional haze plan. This plan also meets the visibility requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA proposes that Wisconsin has satisfied the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) 
with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 
SO2 NAAQS.

K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data

    SIPs must provide for performing air quality modeling for 
predicting effects on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant 
and submission of such data to EPA upon request.
    WDNR maintains the capability to perform computer modeling of the 
air quality impacts of emissions of all criteria pollutants, including 
both source-oriented and more regionally directed complex photochemical 
grid models. WDNR collaborates with LADCO, EPA, and other Lake Michigan 
states in order to perform modeling. Wis. Stats. 285.11, Wis. Stats. 
285.13, and Wis. Stats. 285.60-285.69 authorize WDNR to perform 
modeling. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2008 ozone, 
2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees

    This section requires SIPs to mandate each major stationary source 
to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of reviewing, approving, 
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
    WDNR implements and operates the title V permit program, which EPA 
approved on December 4, 2001 (66 FR 62951). EPA approved revisions to 
the program on February 28, 2006 (71 FR 9934). NR 410 contains the 
provisions, requirements, and structures associated with the costs for 
reviewing, approving, implementing, and enforcing various types of 
permits. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2008 ozone, 2010 
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected Local 
Entities

    States must consult with and allow participation from local 
political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
    In addition to the measures outlined in the paragraph addressing 
WDNR's submittals regarding consultation requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(J), as contained in Wis. Stats. 285.13(5), the state follows 
a formal public hearing process in the development and adoption of all 
SIP revisions that entail new or revised control programs or strategies 
and targets. For SIP revisions covering more than one source, WDNR is 
required to provide the standing committees of the state legislature 
with jurisdiction over environmental matters with a 60 day review 
period to ensure that local entities have been properly engaged in the 
development process. EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve most elements of submissions from 
Wisconsin certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the 
required infrastructure elements under section 110(a)(1) and (2) for 
the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
    EPA's proposed actions for the state's satisfaction of 
infrastructure SIP requirements, by element of section 110(a)(2) and 
NAAQS, are contained in the table below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Element                       2008 Ozone                 2010 NO2                 2010 SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A)--Emission limits and other        A                         A                        A
 control measures.
(B)--Ambient air quality monitoring/  A                         A                        A
 data system.
(C)1--Program for enforcement of      A                         A                        A
 control measures.
(C)2--PSD...........................  NA                        NA                       NA
(D)1--I Prong 1: Interstate           NA                        A                        NA
 transport--significant contribution.
(D)2--I Prong 2: Interstate           NA                        A                        NA
 transport--interfere with
 maintenance.
(D)3--II Prong 3: Interstate          NA                        NA                       NA
 transport--prevention of
 significant deterioration.
(D)4--II Prong 4: Interstate          A                         A                        A
 transport--protect visibility.
(D)5--Interstate and international    A                         A                        A
 pollution abatement.
(E)1--Adequate resources............  A                         A                        A
(E)2--State board requirements......  NA                        NA                       NA
(F)--Stationary source monitoring     A                         A                        A
 system.
(G)--Emergency power................  A                         A                        A
(H)--Future SIP revisions...........  A                         A                        A
(I)--Nonattainment planning           NA                        NA                       NA
 requirements of part D.
(J)1--Consultation with government    A                         A                        A
 officials.
(J)2--Public notification...........  A                         A                        A
(J)3--PSD...........................  NA                        NA                       NA
(J)4--Visibility protection.........  A                         A                        A
(K)--Air quality modeling/data......  A                         A                        A
(L)--Permitting fees................  A                         A                        A
(M)--Consultation and participation   A                         A                        A
 by affected local entities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows:
 A--Approve.
 NA--No Action/Separate Rulemaking.


[[Page 21691]]

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: April 2, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-09051 Filed 4-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P