Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 8460-8465 [2016-03404]
Download as PDF
8460
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
for inclusion into Puerto Rico’s SIP to
address the requirements of Sections
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and 128 of the CAA. EPA
is further proposing to approve these
submissions, which are intended to
apply to any person subject to CAA 128,
for inclusion into the SIP as meeting
CAA obligations section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, 2006
PM2.5, 2008 lead, and 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
EPA is disapproving the following
infrastructure SIP requirements as they
relate to the PSD program for lack of a
State adopted PSD rule to satisfy section
110(a)(2) for the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS, 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
and 2008 lead NAAQS: sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i) prong 3, (D)(ii) and
(J). It should be noted that a FIP clock
will not be started because a PSD FIP is
currently in place, and sanctions will
not be triggered. Since Puerto Rico is
not required to address the visibility
portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) in the
context of an infrastructure SIP, and
therefore did not make a submission,
action on this sub-element is not
applicable.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Puerto Rico’s ‘‘Environmental Public
Policy Act,’’ Act No. 416 (2004, as
amended), Section 7.A, and Section 7.D
and ‘‘Puerto Rico Government Ethics
Law,’’ Act. No. 1 (approved January 3,
2012), Section 5. These provisions are
intended to apply to any person subject
to CAA Section 128. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these
documents generally available
electronically through https://
www.regulations (see the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. 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 proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• 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, this proposed rulemaking
action, pertaining to Puerto Rico’s
section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements for the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS, 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, and 2008 lead NAAQS does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: February 9, 2016.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2016–03395 Filed 2–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0529; FRL–9942–57–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;
Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
some elements of a state
implementation plan (SIP) submission
from Wisconsin regarding the
infrastructure requirements of section
110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
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 March 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2015–0529 at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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 this SIP
submission?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
this SIP submission?
III. What is the result of EPA’s review of this
SIP submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of this SIP
submission?
A. What state SIP submission does this
rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses a
submission from the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR). The state submitted its
infrastructure SIP for the 2012
PM2.5 1 NAAQS on July 13, 2015.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Why did the state make this SIP
submission?
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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. This submission 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 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
1 PM
2.5 refers to particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers,
oftentimes referred to as ‘‘fine’’ particles.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
Plan (SIP) Elements under CAA
Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)’’ (2013
Guidance). The SIP submission
referenced in this rulemaking pertains
to the applicable requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and (2), and addresses
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP
submission from Wisconsin that
addresses the infrastructure
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1)
and (2) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The
requirement for states to make SIP
submissions of this type arises out of
CAA section 110(a)(1). 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
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8461
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, ‘‘Approval and
Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Illinois,
Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin;
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 guidance is EPA using to
evaluate this SIP submission?
EPA’s guidance for this infrastructure
SIP submission is embodied in the 2007
Guidance referenced previously.
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, EPA issued additional
guidance, the most recent being the
2013 Guidance that further clarifies
aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are
not NAAQS specific.
III. What is the result of EPA’s review
of this SIP submission?
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 19, 2015, held a public
hearing at WDNR state Headquarters on
June 17, 2015, and closed the public
comment period on June 19, 2015. No
comments were received during the
WDNR’s public comment period.
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
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The following
review evaluates the state’s submission.
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,
as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, and other related matters.
However, EPA has long interpreted
emission limits and control measures
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8462
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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.
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 rulemaking 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.’’ The following current
Wisconsin Administrative Code
Chapters Natural Resources (NR)
contain existing emission limits and
control requirements that apply to
particulate emissions:
Chapter NR 415, Wis. Adm. Code—
Control of Particulate Emissions
Chapter NR 431, Wis. Adm. Code—
Control of Visible Emissions
These regulations can be applied to the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
On January 1, 2015, EPA began
implementing the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Wisconsin is
subject to CSAPR’s requirements
regarding annual oxides of nitrogen
2 See, e.g., EPA’s final rule on ‘‘National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Lead.’’ 73 FR 66964 at
67034.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
(NOX) and SO2 power plant emissions,
which are intended to address transport
of PM2.5 to downwind states. EPA and
WDNR expect that CSAPR will result in
reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from
Wisconsin’s power plants, which will
assist Wisconsin’s efforts to attain and
maintain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not
proposing to approve any new
provisions in NR 415 or NR 431 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 2012 PM2.5 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 EPAapproved 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. PSD.
Section 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 PM
10 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.
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
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.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not
evaluating section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
requirements relating to significant
contribution to transport for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, EPA will
evaluate these requirements in a
separate rulemaking.
2. Interstate transport—interfere with
maintenance.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not
evaluating section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
requirements relating to interference
with maintenance for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. Instead, EPA will evaluate
these requirements in a separate
rulemaking.
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 separate
rulemakings.
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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
5. Interstate and international
pollution abatement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 the EPAapproved portion of its PSD program
requiring new or modified sources to
notify neighboring states of potential
negative air quality impacts.
Wisconsin’s submission references these
provisions as being adequate to meet the
requirements of section 126(a).
Wisconsin has no pending obligations
under section 115. Therefore, EPA is
proposing that Wisconsin has met all
applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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)
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8463
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.
On July 2, 2015, WDNR submitted
rules from Wis. Stats. for incorporation
into the SIP, pursuant to section 128 of
the CAA. Wisconsin maintains a state
board, called the Wisconsin Natural
Resources Board (NRB). However, the
NRB’s functions are purely regulatory,
advisory, and policy-making. Under
Wis. Stats. 15.05, the administrative
powers and duties of the WDNR,
including issuance of permits and
enforcement orders, are vested in the
secretary. Under the statutes that govern
its operations, the NRB does not and
cannot approve permits or enforcement
orders. Therefore, Wisconsin has no
further obligations under section
128(a)(1) of the CAA.
Under section 128(a)(2) of the CAA,
the head of the executive agency with
the power to approve permits or
enforcement orders must adequately
disclose any potential conflicts of
interest. In Wisconsin, this power is
vested in the Secretary of the WDNR.
Wis. Stats. 19.45(2) prevents financial
gain of any public official, which
addresses the issue of deriving any
significant portion of income from
persons subject to permits and
enforcement orders. Additionally, Wis.
Stats. 19.46 prevents a public official
from taking actions where there is a
conflict of interest. As a public official
under Wis. Stats. 19, the Secretary of the
WDNR is subject to these ethical
obligations. EPA concludes that
WDNR’s submission as it relates to the
state board requirements under section
128 is consistent with applicable CAA
requirements. EPA approved these rules
on Thursday, January 21, 2016 (81 FR
3334). Therefore, EPA is proposing that
Wisconsin has satisfied the applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements for this
section of 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
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
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
8464
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 requires 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 2012 PM2.5 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
attaining the NAAQS, or 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
2012 PM2.5 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 submission
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 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. Public notification.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 of the
NAAQS. WDNR maintains portions of
its Web site specifically for issues
related to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.5
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality
Modeling/Data
SIPs must provide for the
performance of air quality modeling for
predicting effects on air quality of
emissions from any NAAQS pollutant
and the 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 dispersion models and
more regionally directed complex
photochemical grid models. WDNR
5 https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/
Particles.html.
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 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
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most
elements of the submission from
Wisconsin certifying that its current SIP
is sufficient to meet the required
infrastructure elements under section
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
EPA’s proposed actions for the state’s
satisfaction of infrastructure SIP
requirements, by element of section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
110(a)(2) and NAAQS, are contained in
the table below.
Element
2012 PM2.5
(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
A
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.
V. 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8465
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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 3, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016–03404 Filed 2–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\19FEP1.SGM
19FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8460-8465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03404]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0529; FRL-9942-57-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve some elements of a state implementation plan (SIP) submission
from Wisconsin regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2012 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) 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 March 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0529 at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the
[[Page 8461]]
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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 this SIP submission?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission?
III. What is the result of EPA's review of this SIP submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
A. What state SIP submission does this rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses a submission from the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). The state submitted its
infrastructure SIP for the 2012 PM2.5 \1\ NAAQS on July 13,
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Why did the state make this SIP submission?
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
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. This submission 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 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
110(a)(2)'' (2013 Guidance). The SIP submission referenced in this
rulemaking pertains to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1)
and (2), and addresses the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Wisconsin that addresses
the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make SIP
submissions of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). 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, ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin;
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 guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission?
EPA's guidance for this infrastructure SIP submission is embodied
in the 2007 Guidance referenced previously. 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, EPA
issued additional guidance, the most recent being the 2013 Guidance
that further clarifies aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not
NAAQS specific.
III. What is the result of EPA's review of this SIP submission?
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 19,
2015, held a public hearing at WDNR state Headquarters on June 17,
2015, and closed the public comment period on June 19, 2015. No
comments were received during the WDNR's public comment period.
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The following review evaluates the
state's submission.
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, as well as schedules
and timetables for compliance, and other related matters. However, EPA
has long interpreted emission limits and control measures
[[Page 8462]]
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 rulemaking 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.'' The following current
Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters Natural Resources (NR) contain
existing emission limits and control requirements that apply to
particulate emissions:
Chapter NR 415, Wis. Adm. Code--Control of Particulate Emissions
Chapter NR 431, Wis. Adm. Code--Control of Visible Emissions
These regulations can be applied to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
On January 1, 2015, EPA began implementing the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Wisconsin is subject to CSAPR's requirements
regarding annual oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and SO2
power plant emissions, which are intended to address transport of
PM2.5 to downwind states. EPA and WDNR expect that CSAPR
will result in reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from
Wisconsin's power plants, which will assist Wisconsin's efforts to
attain and maintain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve any new
provisions in NR 415 or NR 431 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 2012 PM2.5 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. PSD.
Section 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8463]]
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 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.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not evaluating section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements relating to significant contribution to
transport for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, EPA will
evaluate these requirements in a separate rulemaking.
2. Interstate transport--interfere with maintenance.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not evaluating section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements relating to interference with
maintenance for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, EPA will
evaluate these requirements in a separate rulemaking.
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
separate rulemakings.
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 2012 PM2.5 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 the EPA-approved portion of its PSD
program requiring new or modified sources to notify neighboring states
of potential negative air quality impacts. Wisconsin's submission
references these provisions as being adequate to meet the requirements
of section 126(a). Wisconsin has no pending obligations under section
115. Therefore, EPA is proposing that Wisconsin has met all applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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.
On July 2, 2015, WDNR submitted rules from Wis. Stats. for
incorporation into the SIP, pursuant to section 128 of the CAA.
Wisconsin maintains a state board, called the Wisconsin Natural
Resources Board (NRB). However, the NRB's functions are purely
regulatory, advisory, and policy-making. Under Wis. Stats. 15.05, the
administrative powers and duties of the WDNR, including issuance of
permits and enforcement orders, are vested in the secretary. Under the
statutes that govern its operations, the NRB does not and cannot
approve permits or enforcement orders. Therefore, Wisconsin has no
further obligations under section 128(a)(1) of the CAA.
Under section 128(a)(2) of the CAA, the head of the executive
agency with the power to approve permits or enforcement orders must
adequately disclose any potential conflicts of interest. In Wisconsin,
this power is vested in the Secretary of the WDNR. Wis. Stats. 19.45(2)
prevents financial gain of any public official, which addresses the
issue of deriving any significant portion of income from persons
subject to permits and enforcement orders. Additionally, Wis. Stats.
19.46 prevents a public official from taking actions where there is a
conflict of interest. As a public official under Wis. Stats. 19, the
Secretary of the WDNR is subject to these ethical obligations. EPA
concludes that WDNR's submission as it relates to the state board
requirements under section 128 is consistent with applicable CAA
requirements. EPA approved these rules on Thursday, January 21, 2016
(81 FR 3334). Therefore, EPA is proposing that Wisconsin has satisfied
the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for this section of
110(a)(2)(E) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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
[[Page 8464]]
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 2012 PM2.5 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 requires 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 2012 PM2.5 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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 submission 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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 of the NAAQS. WDNR
maintains portions of its Web site specifically for issues related to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\5\ 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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/Particles.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
SIPs must provide for the performance of air quality modeling for
predicting effects on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant
and the 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 dispersion models and more regionally directed
complex photochemical grid models. WDNR
[[Page 8465]]
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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most elements of the submission from
Wisconsin certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the
required infrastructure elements under section 110(a)(1) and (2) for
the 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A)--Emission limits and other control A
measures.
(B)--Ambient air quality monitoring/data A
system.
(C)1--Program for enforcement of control A
measures.
(C)2--PSD................................. NA
(D)1--I Prong 1: Interstate transport-- NA
significant contribution.
(D)2--I Prong 2: Interstate transport-- NA
interfere with maintenance.
(D)3--II Prong 3: Interstate transport-- NA
prevention of significant deterioration.
(D)4--II Prong 4: Interstate transport-- A
protect visibility.
(D)5--Interstate and international A
pollution abatement.
(E)1--Adequate resources.................. A
(E)2--State board requirements............ A
(F)--Stationary source monitoring system.. A
(G)--Emergency power...................... A
(H)--Future SIP revisions................. A
(I)--Nonattainment planning requirements NA
of part D.
(J)1--Consultation with government A
officials.
(J)2--Public notification................. A
(J)3--PSD................................. NA
(J)4--Visibility protection............... A
(K)--Air quality modeling/data............ A
(L)--Permitting fees...................... A
(M)--Consultation and participation by A
affected local entities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Approve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NA..................................... No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 3, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016-03404 Filed 2-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P