Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Reasonable Further Progress Plan, 57463-57466 [2016-20002]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C.
1531–1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The
action imposes no enforceable duty on
any state, local or tribal governments or
the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. This good cause final
action simply extends the date for the
EPA to take action on a petition. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
health or safety standard. This good
cause final action simply extends the
date for the EPA to take action on a
petition and does not have any impact
on human health or the environment.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. The CRA allows the issuing
agency to make a rule effective sooner
than otherwise provided by the CRA if
the agency makes a good cause finding
that notice-and-comment rulemaking
procedures are impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public
interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has
made a good cause finding for this rule
as discussed in Section II.B of this
document, including the basis for that
finding.
IV. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 110, 126 and
307 of the CAA as amended (42 U.S.C.
7410, 7426 and 7607).
V. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
judicial review of this final rule is
available only by the filing of a petition
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the appropriate circuit by October
24, 2016. Under section 307(b)(2) of the
CAA, the requirements that are the
subject of this final rule may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings brought by us to enforce
these requirements.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practices and
procedures, Air pollution control,
Electric utilities, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone.
Dated: August 15, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–20140 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action is
not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59
FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it
does not establish an environmental
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:39 Aug 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57463
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0075; FRL–9950–86–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;
Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area Reasonable
Further Progress Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving an Early
Progress Plan and motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) for the Kenosha
County, Wisconsin 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. Wisconsin
submitted an Early Progress Plan for
Kenosha County on January 16, 2015.
This submittal was developed to
establish MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008
8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This
approval of the Early Progress Plan for
the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is based on EPA’s
determination that Wisconsin has
demonstrated that the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing these MVEBs, when
considered with the emissions from all
sources, shows progress toward
attainment from the 2011 base year
through a 2015 target year.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by
September 22, 2016. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2015–0075 at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
persoon.carolyn@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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
57464
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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
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:
Michael Leslie, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680,
leslie.michael@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 for this action?
II. What are the criteria for early progress
plans?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the request?
IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha
County 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. What is the background for this
action?
EPA’s final rule designating
nonattainment areas and associated
classifications for the 2008 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) was published in the Federal
Register on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088).
A portion of Kenosha County was
designated as marginal nonattainment.
The Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area had been previously
designated nonattainment as part of the
larger Milwaukee area for the 1997 8hour ozone standard and had MVEBs for
NOX and VOC established in the
Wisconsin 1997 8-hour maintenance
plan SIP. Consequently, the
transportation partners in the Kenosha
area have to use the 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment MVEBs for the
Milwaukee area to demonstrate
transportation conformity for the 2008
8-hour ozone standard until new
MVEBs are approved or found adequate,
as required by the transportation
conformity rule at 40 CFR
93.109(c)(2)(i). Wisconsin submitted
this plan to establish new MVEBs for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:39 Aug 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
Kenosha County developed with EPA’s
MOVES2014 model.
II. What are the criteria for early
progress plans?
EPA allows for the establishment of
MVEBs for the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard prior to a state submitting its
first required 2008 8-hour ozone SIP
that would include new MVEBs.
Although voluntary, these ‘‘early’’
MVEBs must be established through a
plan that meets all the requirements of
a SIP submittal. This plan is known as
the ‘‘Early Progress Plan.’’ Specifically
and in reference to Early Progress Plans,
the preamble of the July 1, 2004, final
transportation conformity rule (see, 69
FR 40019) reads as follows:
The first 8-hour ozone SIP could be a
control strategy SIP required by the Clean Air
Act (e.g., rate-of-progress SIP or attainment
demonstration) or a maintenance plan.
However, 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas
‘are free to establish, through the SIP process,
a motor vehicle emissions budget or budgets
that addresses the new NAAQS in advance
of a complete SIP attainment demonstration.
That is, a state could submit a motor vehicle
emission budget that does not demonstrate
attainment but is consistent with projections
and commitments to control measures and
achieves some progress toward attainment’
(August 15, 1997, 62 FR 43799). A SIP
submitted earlier than otherwise required can
demonstrate a significant level of emissions
reductions from current level of emissions,
instead of a specific percentage required by
the Clean Air Act for moderate and above
ozone areas.
The Early Progress Plan must
demonstrate that the SIP revision
containing the MVEBs, when
considered with emissions from all
sources, and when projected from the
base year to a future year, shows
progress toward attainment. EPA has
previously indicated that a 5 percent to
10 percent reduction in emissions from
all sources could represent a significant
level of emissions reductions from
current levels (69 FR 40019). This
allowance is provided so that areas have
an opportunity to use the budget test to
demonstrate conformity as opposed to
the interim conformity tests (i.e., 2002
baseline test and/or action versus
baseline test). The budget test with an
adequate or approved SIP budget is
generally more protective of air quality
and provides a more relevant basis for
conformity determinations than the
interim emissions test. (69 FR 40026).
It should also be noted that the Early
Progress Plan is not a required plan and
does not substitute for required
submissions such as an attainment
demonstration or rate-of-progress plan,
if such plans become required for the
Kenosha 8-hour ozone area.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the
request?
On January 16, 2015, the State
submitted to EPA an Early Progress Plan
for the sole purpose of establishing
MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area. The
submittal utilizes a base year of 2011,
and a projected year 2015 to establish
NOX and VOC MVEBs. The planning
assumptions used to develop the
MVEBs were discussed and agreed to by
the Kenosha interagency consultation
group, which consists of the
transportation and air quality partners
in the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. Tables 1 and 2
below show the differences by source
categories between the 2011 base year
and 2015 forecast year. The NOX and
VOC emissions in tons per day (tpd)
within the Kenosha nonattainment area
are expected to decrease significantly,
6.9 percent and 8.9 percent,
respectively, between 2011 and 2015.
These emission trends demonstrate that
progress will be made towards
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
TABLE 1—KENOSHA COUNTY 2008
OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA NOX
EMISSIONS
[Kenosha County NOX Emissions]
Source
2015
NOX
(tpd)
2011
NOX
(tpd)
Point ..........................
Area ..........................
On-road Mobile .........
Non-Road Mobile ......
8.80
1.09
5.17
2.14
6.15
1.33
4.40
1.69
Total ...................
17.17
15.98
Total Percent Reduction ........................
6.9%
TABLE 2—KENOSHA COUNTY 2008
OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA VOC
EMISSIONS
[Kenosha County VOC Emissions]
VOC Source
2011
VOC
(tpd)
2015
VOC
(tpd)
Point ..........................
Area ..........................
On-road Mobile .........
Non-Road Mobile ......
0.70
4.78
2.38
1.46
2.63
4.72
1.99
1.08
Total ...................
9.32
8.49
Total Percent Reduction ........................
8.9%
EPA found these MVEBs adequate for
transportation conformity purposes in
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
an earlier action (80 FR 17428, April 1,
2015). As of April 16, 2015, the effective
date of EPA’s adequacy finding for these
MVEBs, conformity determinations in
Kenosha County must meet the budget
test using these 2008 8-hour ozone
MVEBs, instead of the 1997 8-hour
ozone MVEBs. Please note that this
adequacy finding does not relate to the
merits of the SIP submittal, nor does it
indicate whether the submittal meets
the requirements for approval. This EPA
rulemaking action takes formal action
on the Early Progress Plan SIP revision.
IV. What are the MVEBs for the
Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area?
Through this rulemaking, EPA is
approving the 2015 regional MVEBs for
NOX and VOC for the Kenosha County
2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
EPA has determined that the MVEBs
contained in the Early Progress Plan SIP
revision are consistent with emission
reductions from all sources within the
nonattainment area and are showing
progress toward attainment.
The 2015 MVEBs in tpd for VOCs and
NOX for the Kenosha County, Wisconsin
nonattainment area are as follows:
2015
VOCs
(tpd)
Kenosha County .......
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Area
2015
NOX
(tpd)
4.397
1.944
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving Kenosha’s Early
Progress Plan, including the 2015
MVEBs for NOX and VOC. The Early
Progress Plan demonstrates progress
towards attainment of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the Kenosha
nonattainment area. The NOX and VOC
emissions reductions from 2011 to 2015
for Kenosha County nonattainment
areas were 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent,
respectively. These emission reductions
are based on control measures that are
permanent and enforceable and will
continue to improve air quality in the
region, thus demonstrating that the
MVEBs are showing progress toward
attainment.
EPA issues this direct final
rulemaking in response to Wisconsin’s
January 16, 2015 submittal of an Early
Progress Plan. This revision is a
voluntary SIP revision for the sole
purpose of establishing MVEBs for the
purpose of implementing transportation
conformity in the Kenosha County 2008
8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:39 Aug 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
State plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective October 24, 2016 without
further notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by September
22, 2016. If we receive such comments,
we will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. If we do not receive any
comments, this action will be effective
October 24, 2016.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act. 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57465
• 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 Clean Air Act;
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 Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by October 24, 2016.
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
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
57466
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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 CAA
section 307(b)(2).)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
SUMMARY:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Volatile organic compounds,
Oxides of nitrogen.
Dated: August 5, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting 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 52.2585 is amended by
adding paragraph (ee) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2585
Control strategy; ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(ee) Approval—On January 16, 2015,
the State of Wisconsin submitted a
revision to its State Implementation
Plan for Kenosha County, Wisconsin.
The submittal established new Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) for the year
2015. The MVEBs for Kenosha County
nonattainment area are now: 1.994 tons
per day of VOC emissions and 4.397
tons per day of NOX emissions for the
year 2015.
[FR Doc. 2016–20002 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am]
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:39 Aug 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0418; FRL–9950–94–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Minor New Source Review—Nonroad
Engines
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Commonwealth of Virginia state
implementation plan (SIP). The
revisions amend the definition of
‘‘nonroad engine’’ under Virginia’s
minor New Source Review (NSR)
requirements to align with Federal
requirements. EPA is approving these
revisions to the Virginia SIP in
accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on October
24, 2016 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse written comment
by September 22, 2016. If EPA receives
such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2016–0418 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
campbell.dave@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
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Talley, (215) 814–2117, or by
email at talley.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 17, 2014, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), on behalf of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, submitted a
formal revision to its SIP. The SIP
revision consists of amendments to the
definition of ‘‘nonroad engine’’ under
VADEQ’s minor NSR regulations.
Virginia has a SIP approved minor NSR
program located in the Virginia
Administrative Code (VAC) at 9VAC 5–
80 which regulates certain
modifications and construction of
stationary sources within areas covered
by its SIP as necessary to assure the
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) are achieved.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
VADEQ’s June 17, 2014 SIP submittal
includes revisions to the definition of
‘‘nonroad engine’’ under the VAC,
specifically 9VAC5–80–1110. The
definition of ‘‘nonroad engine’’ was
expanded to include portable and
temporary engines. The revision to
9VAC5–80–1110 makes VADEQ’s
definition more consistent with the
Federal definition at 40 CFR 89.2.
According to VADEQ, Federal design
standards for internal combustion
engines and Federal fuel standards for
engines are already more restrictive than
permit requirements for portable and
temporary engines in Virginia’s minor
NSR program. Virginia’s amended
definition adopts the Federal definition
of ‘‘nonroad engine,’’ grouping portable
engines and temporary engines together
with other non-mobile engines. The
revised definition will streamline
Virginia’s minor NSR program by no
longer requiring VADEQ to issue minor
NSR permits without meaningful
additional emissions control
requirements on those engines. Virginia
asserted the amended definition does
not increase emissions or otherwise
affect air quality.
EPA finds these revisions are
appropriate and meet the Federal
requirements of 40 CFR 51.160 and
51.161, and CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) for
a minor NSR program. Additionally, the
revision to 9VAC5–80–1110(and in
particular the deletions in the revised
regulation) are in accordance with
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57463-57466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20002]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0075; FRL-9950-86-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area Reasonable Further Progress Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving an
Early Progress Plan and motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) for the Kenosha County, Wisconsin 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. Wisconsin submitted an Early Progress Plan for
Kenosha County on January 16, 2015. This submittal was developed to
establish MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
This approval of the Early Progress Plan for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area is based on EPA's determination that Wisconsin
has demonstrated that the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing these MVEBs, when considered with the emissions from all
sources, shows progress toward attainment from the 2011 base year
through a 2015 target year.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 24, 2016,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 22, 2016. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0075 at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
persoon.carolyn@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
[[Page 57464]]
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 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: Michael Leslie, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6680, leslie.michael@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 for this action?
II. What are the criteria for early progress plans?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this action?
EPA's final rule designating nonattainment areas and associated
classifications for the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) was published in the Federal Register on May 21, 2012
(77 FR 30088). A portion of Kenosha County was designated as marginal
nonattainment. The Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
had been previously designated nonattainment as part of the larger
Milwaukee area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and had MVEBs for
NOX and VOC established in the Wisconsin 1997 8-hour
maintenance plan SIP. Consequently, the transportation partners in the
Kenosha area have to use the 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment MVEBs for
the Milwaukee area to demonstrate transportation conformity for the
2008 8-hour ozone standard until new MVEBs are approved or found
adequate, as required by the transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR
93.109(c)(2)(i). Wisconsin submitted this plan to establish new MVEBs
for Kenosha County developed with EPA's MOVES2014 model.
II. What are the criteria for early progress plans?
EPA allows for the establishment of MVEBs for the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard prior to a state submitting its first required 2008 8-hour
ozone SIP that would include new MVEBs. Although voluntary, these
``early'' MVEBs must be established through a plan that meets all the
requirements of a SIP submittal. This plan is known as the ``Early
Progress Plan.'' Specifically and in reference to Early Progress Plans,
the preamble of the July 1, 2004, final transportation conformity rule
(see, 69 FR 40019) reads as follows:
The first 8-hour ozone SIP could be a control strategy SIP
required by the Clean Air Act (e.g., rate-of-progress SIP or
attainment demonstration) or a maintenance plan. However, 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas `are free to establish, through the SIP
process, a motor vehicle emissions budget or budgets that addresses
the new NAAQS in advance of a complete SIP attainment demonstration.
That is, a state could submit a motor vehicle emission budget that
does not demonstrate attainment but is consistent with projections
and commitments to control measures and achieves some progress
toward attainment' (August 15, 1997, 62 FR 43799). A SIP submitted
earlier than otherwise required can demonstrate a significant level
of emissions reductions from current level of emissions, instead of
a specific percentage required by the Clean Air Act for moderate and
above ozone areas.
The Early Progress Plan must demonstrate that the SIP revision
containing the MVEBs, when considered with emissions from all sources,
and when projected from the base year to a future year, shows progress
toward attainment. EPA has previously indicated that a 5 percent to 10
percent reduction in emissions from all sources could represent a
significant level of emissions reductions from current levels (69 FR
40019). This allowance is provided so that areas have an opportunity to
use the budget test to demonstrate conformity as opposed to the interim
conformity tests (i.e., 2002 baseline test and/or action versus
baseline test). The budget test with an adequate or approved SIP budget
is generally more protective of air quality and provides a more
relevant basis for conformity determinations than the interim emissions
test. (69 FR 40026).
It should also be noted that the Early Progress Plan is not a
required plan and does not substitute for required submissions such as
an attainment demonstration or rate-of-progress plan, if such plans
become required for the Kenosha 8-hour ozone area.
III. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
On January 16, 2015, the State submitted to EPA an Early Progress
Plan for the sole purpose of establishing MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area. The submittal utilizes a base year of
2011, and a projected year 2015 to establish NOX and VOC
MVEBs. The planning assumptions used to develop the MVEBs were
discussed and agreed to by the Kenosha interagency consultation group,
which consists of the transportation and air quality partners in the
Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. Tables 1 and 2 below show
the differences by source categories between the 2011 base year and
2015 forecast year. The NOX and VOC emissions in tons per
day (tpd) within the Kenosha nonattainment area are expected to
decrease significantly, 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively,
between 2011 and 2015. These emission trends demonstrate that progress
will be made towards attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Table 1--Kenosha County 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area NOX Emissions
[Kenosha County NOX Emissions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 NOX 2015 NOX
Source (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................. 8.80 6.15
Area.............................................. 1.09 1.33
On-road Mobile.................................... 5.17 4.40
Non-Road Mobile................................... 2.14 1.69
---------------------
Total......................................... 17.17 15.98
---------------------
Total Percent Reduction........................... 6.9%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Kenosha County 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area VOC Emissions
[Kenosha County VOC Emissions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 VOC 2015 VOC
VOC Source (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................. 0.70 2.63
Area.............................................. 4.78 4.72
On-road Mobile.................................... 2.38 1.99
Non-Road Mobile................................... 1.46 1.08
---------------------
Total......................................... 9.32 8.49
---------------------
Total Percent Reduction........................... 8.9%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA found these MVEBs adequate for transportation conformity
purposes in
[[Page 57465]]
an earlier action (80 FR 17428, April 1, 2015). As of April 16, 2015,
the effective date of EPA's adequacy finding for these MVEBs,
conformity determinations in Kenosha County must meet the budget test
using these 2008 8-hour ozone MVEBs, instead of the 1997 8-hour ozone
MVEBs. Please note that this adequacy finding does not relate to the
merits of the SIP submittal, nor does it indicate whether the submittal
meets the requirements for approval. This EPA rulemaking action takes
formal action on the Early Progress Plan SIP revision.
IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area?
Through this rulemaking, EPA is approving the 2015 regional MVEBs
for NOX and VOC for the Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. EPA has determined that the MVEBs contained in the
Early Progress Plan SIP revision are consistent with emission
reductions from all sources within the nonattainment area and are
showing progress toward attainment.
The 2015 MVEBs in tpd for VOCs and NOX for the Kenosha
County, Wisconsin nonattainment area are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015 NOX 2015 VOCs
Area (tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenosha County.................................. 4.397 1.944
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving Kenosha's Early Progress Plan, including the 2015
MVEBs for NOX and VOC. The Early Progress Plan demonstrates
progress towards attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
Kenosha nonattainment area. The NOX and VOC emissions
reductions from 2011 to 2015 for Kenosha County nonattainment areas
were 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively. These emission
reductions are based on control measures that are permanent and
enforceable and will continue to improve air quality in the region,
thus demonstrating that the MVEBs are showing progress toward
attainment.
EPA issues this direct final rulemaking in response to Wisconsin's
January 16, 2015 submittal of an Early Progress Plan. This revision is
a voluntary SIP revision for the sole purpose of establishing MVEBs for
the purpose of implementing transportation conformity in the Kenosha
County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the State plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 24,
2016 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by September 22, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective
October 24, 2016.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
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 Clean Air Act.
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 Clean Air Act; 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 24, 2016. 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
[[Page 57466]]
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
CAA section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds, Oxides of nitrogen.
Dated: August 5, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
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 52.2585 is amended by adding paragraph (ee) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2585 Control strategy; ozone.
* * * * *
(ee) Approval--On January 16, 2015, the State of Wisconsin
submitted a revision to its State Implementation Plan for Kenosha
County, Wisconsin. The submittal established new Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) for the year 2015. The MVEBs for
Kenosha County nonattainment area are now: 1.994 tons per day of VOC
emissions and 4.397 tons per day of NOX emissions for the
year 2015.
[FR Doc. 2016-20002 Filed 8-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P