Air Plan Disapproval; Wisconsin; Redesignation Request for the Wisconsin Portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard, 16214-16216 [2019-07715]

Download as PDF 16214 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 75 / Thursday, April 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations Dam to Lake Michigan including Des Plaines River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, CalumetSaganashkee Channel, Chicago, IL, listed in 33 CFR 165.930. The safety zone will encompass all waters of the South Branch Chicago River east of the Ashland Avenue Bridge, north of the Adlai E. Stevenson Expressway Bridge and west of the South Halsted Street Bridge. Enforcement will occur from April 15, 2019 through April 21, 2019. Construction involving airlifts will take place from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. intermittently in fifteen-minute intervals. During the enforcement period, no vessel may transit this regulated area without approval from the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan or a Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan designated representative. Vessels and persons granted permission to enter the safety zone shall obey all lawful orders or directions of the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative. This notice of enforcement is issued under the authority of 33 CFR 165.930 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this publication in the Federal Register, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will also provide notice through other means, which will include Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Additionally, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan may notify representatives from the maritime industry through telephonic notifications, email notifications, or by direct communication from on scene patrol commanders. If the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated representative determines that the regulated area does not need to be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice of enforcement, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the regulated area. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative may be contacted via Channel 16, VHF–FM or at (414) 747– 7182. Dated: April 15, 2019. Thomas J. Stuhlreyer, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. 2019–07819 Filed 4–17–19; 8:45 am] jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2018–0713] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL Coast Guard, DHS. Correcting amendments. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard published a document in the Federal Register on March 4, 2019, concerning a final rule for the Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL. The final rule contained an error in the coordinates within the regulatory text. This document corrects the regulation. DATES: This rule is effective May 20, 2019. SUMMARY: If you have questions about this rule, call or email LT John Ramos, Waterways Management Division, Marine Safety Unit Chicago, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (630) 986–2155, email D09DG-MSUChicago-Waterways@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Coast Guard’s correction to the final rule published March 4, 2019 (84 FR 7290). This document corrects the coordinates for the location of the safety zone. This is the first correction. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. Accordingly, 33 CFR part 165 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Amend § 165.931 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: ■ § 165.931 Safety Zone, Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: The waters of Lake Michigan within Chicago Harbor bounded by coordinates beginning at 41°53′23.3″ N, 087°36′04.5″ W; then VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Apr 17, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 south to 41°53′11.8″ N, 087°36′04.1″ W; then west to 41°53′12.1″ N, 087°35′40.5″ W; then north to 41°53′23.6″ N, 087°35′40.07″ W; then east back to the point of origin (NAD 83). * * * * * Dated: April 15, 2019. Thomas J. Stuhlreyer, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. 2019–07818 Filed 4–17–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0496; FRL–9992–43– Region 5] Air Plan Disapproval; Wisconsin; Redesignation Request for the Wisconsin Portion of the ChicagoNaperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is disapproving an August 15, 2016 request from Wisconsin to redesignate the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-IndianaWisconsin (IL-IN-WI) ozone nonattainment area (Chicago nonattainment area) to attainment of the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard), because the area is violating the standard with 2015–2017 monitoring data. EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin’s maintenance plan and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs), submitted with the State’s redesignation request, since approval of these State Implementation Plan (SIP) components is contingent on attainment of the ozone standard. The Chicago area includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County, and Oswego Township in Kendall County in Illinois; Lake and Porter Counties in Indiana; and the area east of and including the corridor of Interstate 94 in Kenosha County, Wisconsin. SUMMARY: This final rule is effective May 20, 2019. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0496. All documents in the docket are listed in DATES: E:\FR\FM\18APR1.SGM 18APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 75 / Thursday, April 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–1767, dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES I. What is the background for this action? The background for this action is discussed in detail in EPA’s February 15, 2019 proposed rule (84 FR 4426). In that proposed rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50, the 2008 ozone standard is violated when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour ozone concentrations at any monitoring site in the subject area is greater than 0.075 parts per million parts of air (ppm). See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) for further information regarding area designations for the 2008 ozone standard and 77 FR 34221 (June 11, 2012) for information regarding the designation of the Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI area for the 2008 ozone standard. See 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50 regarding the ozone data requirements for a determination of whether an area has attained the 2008 ozone standard. Under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA may redesignate a nonattainment area (or a portion thereof) to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are available to demonstrate that the nonattainment area as a whole has attained the standard and if all other requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) have been met. Wisconsin submitted a request for the redesignation of the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Apr 17, 2019 Jkt 247001 16215 attainment of the 2008 ozone standard on August 15, 2016. The redesignation request included summarized ozone data for all monitors in the ChicagoNaperville, IL-IN-WI ozone nonattainment area along with other information specific to Kenosha County to demonstrate that all requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA have been satisfied. The February 15, 2019 proposed disapproval provides a detailed discussion of the ozone data for the period of 2013 through 2017 (see table 1 in the February 15, 2019 proposed rule at 84 FR 4428), which show a violation of the 2008 ozone standard in the Chicago area based on current, quality-assured ozone data. The proposal also notes that preliminary monitoring data for 2018 indicate that the Chicago nonattainment area will continue to violate the standard when that data is considered. It does not, however, discuss in detail other components of Wisconsin’s submittal because EPA believes that Wisconsin failed to meet the most basic requirement for redesignation, a demonstration that the Chicago ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 ozone standard. We proposed to disapprove Wisconsin’s ozone redesignation request based on the violation of the 2008 ozone standard and proposed to disapprove Wisconsin’s maintenance plan and MVEBs since approval of these SIP components is contingent on attainment of the ozone standard. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule? Unfunded Mandates Reform Act EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the February 15, 2019, proposed rule. The comment period ended on March 18, 2019. We received one comment in support of EPA’s proposed action. We received no adverse comments on the proposed rule. III. What action is EPA taking? Based on the above and the information contained in EPA’s proposed rule, EPA is disapproving Wisconsin’s August 15, 2016 request to redesignate the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to attainment of the 2008 ozone standard, because the Chicago nonattainment area continues to violate this standard based on the most recent three years of quality-assured, certified air quality monitoring data. Because this area continues to violate the 2008 ozone NAAQS, we are also disapproving the ozone maintenance plan and MVEBs included in the State’s submittal. PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and, therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Regulatory Flexibility Act This action merely proposes to disapprove state law as not meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to disapprove pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely proposes to disapprove a state rule, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. E:\FR\FM\18APR1.SGM 18APR1 16216 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 75 / Thursday, April 18, 2019 / Rules and Regulations Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments 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). Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it proposes to disapprove a state rule. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy action,’’ this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). National Technology Transfer Advancement Act jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES In reviewing state submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Apr 17, 2019 Jkt 247001 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or disapprove state choices, based on the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely disapproves certain state requirements for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA and will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements. Accordingly, it 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. Congressional Review Act 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 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 17, 2019. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 4, 2019. Cheryl L. Newton, Deputy 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 (gg) to read as follows: ■ § 52.2585 Control strategy: Ozone. * * * * * (gg) Disapproval—EPA is disapproving Wisconsin’s August 15, 2016, ozone redesignation request for the Wisconsin portion of the ChicagoNaperville, IL–IN–WI nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone standard. EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin’s maintenance plan and motor vehicle emission budgets submitted with the redesignation request. [FR Doc. 2019–07715 Filed 4–17–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\18APR1.SGM 18APR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16214-16216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07715]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0496; FRL-9992-43-Region 5]


Air Plan Disapproval; Wisconsin; Redesignation Request for the 
Wisconsin Portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin 
Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is disapproving an 
August 15, 2016 request from Wisconsin to redesignate the Wisconsin 
portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin (IL-IN-
WI) ozone nonattainment area (Chicago nonattainment area) to attainment 
of the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or 
standard), because the area is violating the standard with 2015-2017 
monitoring data. EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin's maintenance plan 
and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs), submitted with the State's 
redesignation request, since approval of these State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) components is contingent on attainment of the ozone 
standard. The Chicago area includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry 
and Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County, 
and Oswego Township in Kendall County in Illinois; Lake and Porter 
Counties in Indiana; and the area east of and including the corridor of 
Interstate 94 in Kenosha County, Wisconsin.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 20, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0496. All documents in the docket are listed in

[[Page 16215]]

the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not 
placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy 
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through 
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental 
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs 
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is the background for this action?

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in EPA's 
February 15, 2019 proposed rule (84 FR 4426). In that proposed 
rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50, the 2008 
ozone standard is violated when the three-year average of the annual 
fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour ozone concentrations at any 
monitoring site in the subject area is greater than 0.075 parts per 
million parts of air (ppm). See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) for further 
information regarding area designations for the 2008 ozone standard and 
77 FR 34221 (June 11, 2012) for information regarding the designation 
of the Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI area for the 2008 ozone standard. 
See 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50 regarding the ozone 
data requirements for a determination of whether an area has attained 
the 2008 ozone standard. Under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA), EPA may redesignate a nonattainment area (or a portion 
thereof) to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are 
available to demonstrate that the nonattainment area as a whole has 
attained the standard and if all other requirements of section 
107(d)(3)(E) have been met.
    Wisconsin submitted a request for the redesignation of the 
Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to attainment of 
the 2008 ozone standard on August 15, 2016. The redesignation request 
included summarized ozone data for all monitors in the Chicago-
Naperville, IL-IN-WI ozone nonattainment area along with other 
information specific to Kenosha County to demonstrate that all 
requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA have been satisfied. 
The February 15, 2019 proposed disapproval provides a detailed 
discussion of the ozone data for the period of 2013 through 2017 (see 
table 1 in the February 15, 2019 proposed rule at 84 FR 4428), which 
show a violation of the 2008 ozone standard in the Chicago area based 
on current, quality-assured ozone data. The proposal also notes that 
preliminary monitoring data for 2018 indicate that the Chicago 
nonattainment area will continue to violate the standard when that data 
is considered. It does not, however, discuss in detail other components 
of Wisconsin's submittal because EPA believes that Wisconsin failed to 
meet the most basic requirement for redesignation, a demonstration that 
the Chicago ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 ozone 
standard. We proposed to disapprove Wisconsin's ozone redesignation 
request based on the violation of the 2008 ozone standard and proposed 
to disapprove Wisconsin's maintenance plan and MVEBs since approval of 
these SIP components is contingent on attainment of the ozone standard.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the February 
15, 2019, proposed rule. The comment period ended on March 18, 2019. We 
received one comment in support of EPA's proposed action. We received 
no adverse comments on the proposed rule.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    Based on the above and the information contained in EPA's proposed 
rule, EPA is disapproving Wisconsin's August 15, 2016 request to 
redesignate the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to 
attainment of the 2008 ozone standard, because the Chicago 
nonattainment area continues to violate this standard based on the most 
recent three years of quality-assured, certified air quality monitoring 
data. Because this area continues to violate the 2008 ozone NAAQS, we 
are also disapproving the ozone maintenance plan and MVEBs included in 
the State's submittal.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is not subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory 
Costs

    This action is an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because 
this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely proposes to disapprove state law as not meeting 
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule proposes to disapprove pre-existing requirements 
under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty 
beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded 
mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as 
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to disapprove a state rule, and 
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the CAA.

[[Page 16216]]

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    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).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it proposes to disapprove a state rule.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state 
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice 
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to 
approve or disapprove state choices, based on the criteria of the CAA. 
Accordingly, this action merely disapproves certain state requirements 
for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and subchapter I, part D 
of the CAA and will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements. 
Accordingly, it 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.

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by June 17, 2019. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 4, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Deputy 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 (gg) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2585  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (gg) Disapproval--EPA is disapproving Wisconsin's August 15, 2016, 
ozone redesignation request for the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago-
Naperville, IL-IN-WI nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone standard. 
EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin's maintenance plan and motor vehicle 
emission budgets submitted with the redesignation request.

[FR Doc. 2019-07715 Filed 4-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.