Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 54725-54728 [2015-22864]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54725
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by November 10, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Emissions Reporting,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide.
Dated: August 28, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.770, the table in
paragraph (c) is amended by revising the
entry for Rule 7–4.1–21 ‘‘Walsh and
Kelly sulfur dioxide emission
limitations’’ under the subheading
entitled ‘‘Rule 4.1 Lake County Sulfur
Dioxide Emission Limitations’’ under
the heading entitled ‘‘Article 7. Sulfur
Dioxide Rules’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 52.770
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS
Indiana
citation
Indiana
effective date
Subject
*
*
*
*
EPA Approval date
Notes
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
9/11/2015, [insert Federal
Register citation].
*
*
*
Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules
*
*
*
*
Rule 4.1 Lake County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
*
7–4.1–21 ...........................
*
*
*
*
*
*
Walsh and Kelly sulfur dioxide emission limitations ..
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–22716 Filed 9–10–15; 8:45 am]
*
5/29/2015
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
40 CFR Part 52
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704; FRL–9933–62–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;
Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Sep 10, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Final rule.
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action 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. The
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11SER1.SGM
11SER1
54726
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
proposed rulemaking associated with
this final action was published on April
20, 2015, and EPA received no
comments during the comment period,
which ended on May 20, 2015.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
October 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704. 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,
e.g., 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 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 is the background of these SIP
submissions?
II. What action is EPA taking?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Sep 10, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 has highlighted this statutory
requirement in multiple guidance
documents. The most recent, entitled
‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
under CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’,
was published on September 13, 2013.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 because they 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).
II. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is taking final action 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.
The proposed rulemaking associated
with this final action was published on
April 20, 2015 (75 FR 21685), and EPA
received no comments during the
comment period, which ended on May
20, 2015. EPA is therefore taking final
action to approve, as proposed, most
elements of Wisconsin’s submissions.
EPA’s 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.
E:\FR\FM\11SER1.SGM
11SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
54727
Element
2008
Ozone
2010
NO2
2010
SO2
(A)—Emission limits and other control measures ...............................................................................................
(B)—Ambient air quality monitoring/data system ................................................................................................
(C)1—Program for enforcement of control measures .........................................................................................
(C)2—PSD ...........................................................................................................................................................
(D)1—I Prong 1: Interstate transport—significant contribution ...........................................................................
(D)2—I Prong 2: Interstate transport—interfere with maintenance .....................................................................
(D)3—II Prong 3: Interstate transport—prevention of significant deterioration ...................................................
(D)4—II Prong 4: Interstate transport—protect visibility ......................................................................................
(D)5—Interstate and international pollution abatement .......................................................................................
(E)1—Adequate resources ..................................................................................................................................
(E)2—State board requirements ..........................................................................................................................
(F)—Stationary source monitoring system ..........................................................................................................
(G)—Emergency power .......................................................................................................................................
(H)—Future SIP revisions ....................................................................................................................................
(I)—Nonattainment planning requirements of part D ..........................................................................................
(J)1—Consultation with government officials ......................................................................................................
(J)2—Public notification .......................................................................................................................................
(J)3—PSD ............................................................................................................................................................
(J)4—Visibility protection .....................................................................................................................................
(K)—Air quality modeling/data .............................................................................................................................
(L)—Permitting fees .............................................................................................................................................
(M)—Consultation and participation by affected local entities ............................................................................
A
A
A
NA
NA
NA
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
NA
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
NA
A
A
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
NA
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
NA
NA
NA
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
A
NA
A
A
NA
A
A
A
A
In the above table, the key is as follows:
A ....................
NA ..................
Approve.
No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. 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);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Sep 10, 2015
Jkt 235001
• 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by November 10, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
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
oxides.
Dated: August 27, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\11SER1.SGM
11SER1
54728
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817; FRL–9933–76–
OAR]
40 CFR Part 63
■
RIN 2060–AQ93
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
§ 52.2591 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements.
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for the
Portland Cement Manufacturing
Industry and Standards of
Performance for Portland Cement
Plants; Correction
*
AGENCY:
2. Section 52.2591 is amended by
adding paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) to
read as follows:
■
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
(g) Approval—In a June 20, 2013,
submission with a January 28, 2015,
clarification, Wisconsin certified that
the state has satisfied the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. We are not taking
action on the prevention of significant
deterioration requirements related to
section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J),
the transport provisions in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the state board
requirements of (E)(ii). We will address
these requirements in a separate action.
(h) Approval—In a June 20, 2013,
submission with a January 28, 2015,
clarification, Wisconsin certified that
the state has satisfied the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS.
We are not taking action on the
prevention of significant deterioration
requirements related to section
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J), and the
state board requirements of (E)(ii). We
will address these requirements in a
separate action.
(i) Approval—In a June 20, 2013,
submission with a January 28, 2015,
clarification, Wisconsin certified that
the state has satisfied the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. We
are not taking action on the prevention
of significant deterioration requirements
related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II),
and (J), the transport provisions in
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the state
board requirements of (E)(ii). We will
address these requirements in a separate
action.
[FR Doc. 2015–22864 Filed 9–10–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
amendments.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) published a final rule in
the Federal Register on July 27, 2015,
titled National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for the
Portland Cement Manufacturing
Industry and Standards of Performance
for Portland Cement Plants. This final
rule makes technical corrections and
clarifications to the regulations
published in that final rule. The rule
also includes a provision describing
performance testing requirements when
a source demonstrates compliance with
the hydrochloric acid (HCl) emissions
standard using a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for sulfur
dioxide measurement and reporting.
DATES: Effective September 9, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sharon Nizich, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (D243–04), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone number: (919) 541–
2825; facsimile number: (919) 541–5450;
email address: nizich.sharon@epa.gov.
For information about the applicability
of the national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants or new source
performance standards, contact Mr.
Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance
and Media Programs Division (2227A),
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number (202) 564–2970;
email address yellin.patrick@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Summary of Technical Corrections
The EPA received communications
from representatives of the Portland
cement industry on five occasions in
August 2015 (see memo to the docket
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817) titled,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Sep 10, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
‘‘Communications on Errors PCA
August 2015’’). These communications
outlined several errors in the regulatory
text of the final rule (80 FR 44772).
These all pertain to monitoring
requirements. The EPA agrees that these
are errors (typographical and
unintended phrasing or omissions), and
is correcting these errors in this
document. We are also removing two
passages (which consisted of four
sentences) that were inadvertently left
in the final amendments, but were
discussed by the EPA as being removed
in the Response to Comment (RTC)
document for the final amendments (see
docket item EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817–
0870, page 8). In the RTC, we discussed
that data substitution is not an allowed
practice when determining compliance,
but these four sentences discuss
procedures for data substitution.
Leaving these sentences in the rule,
thus, does not reflect the EPA’s stated
intention, and would lead to confusion
given the direct conflict between the
RTC document and the rule text.
We are making one further technical
correction involving timing of
performance tests. The correction keeps
in place the specified time by which
performance tests must be conducted,
but will no longer set out a window of
time in which the test must be
conducted. The net effect is that
performance tests can be conducted
earlier than the window of time in the
current rule text if a source desires to
conduct its performance test earlier. The
EPA had already indicated in the RTC
document that it was making this
change (see docket item EPA–HQ–OAR–
2011–0817–0870, page 5). The EPA
regards this amendment as a
clarification (the current rule could be
interpreted to allow earlier testing) so
that the rule reads precisely as intended,
as stated by the EPA in the RTC
document.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR
POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE
CATEGORIES
1. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\11SER1.SGM
11SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 176 (Friday, September 11, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54725-54728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22864]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0704; FRL-9933-62-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action 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. The
[[Page 54726]]
proposed rulemaking associated with this final action was published on
April 20, 2015, and EPA received no comments during the comment period,
which ended on May 20, 2015.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0704. 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, e.g., 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 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 is the background of these SIP submissions?
II. What action is EPA taking?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. 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 has highlighted this statutory requirement in multiple guidance
documents. The most recent, entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and
(2)'', was published on September 13, 2013.
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 because they
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).
II. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is taking final action 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.
The proposed rulemaking associated with this final action was
published on April 20, 2015 (75 FR 21685), and EPA received no comments
during the comment period, which ended on May 20, 2015. EPA is
therefore taking final action to approve, as proposed, most elements of
Wisconsin's submissions.
EPA's 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.
[[Page 54727]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008
Element 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 10, 2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
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 oxides.
Dated: August 27, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[[Page 54728]]
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. Section 52.2591 is amended by adding paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.2591 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.
* * * * *
(g) Approval--In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. We are not taking
action on the prevention of significant deterioration requirements
related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J), the transport
provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the state board
requirements of (E)(ii). We will address these requirements in a
separate action.
(h) Approval--In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
NAAQS. We are not taking action on the prevention of significant
deterioration requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II),
and (J), and the state board requirements of (E)(ii). We will address
these requirements in a separate action.
(i) Approval--In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2)
NAAQS. We are not taking action on the prevention of significant
deterioration requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II),
and (J), the transport provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and
the state board requirements of (E)(ii). We will address these
requirements in a separate action.
[FR Doc. 2015-22864 Filed 9-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
