[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 80 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24373-24378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09536]
[[Page 24373]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0465; FRL-9805-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Wisconsin; Amendments to Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program for
Wisconsin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR) on June 7, 2012, concerning the State's vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program in southeast Wisconsin. The revision amends
I/M program requirements in the active control measures portion of the
ozone SIP to reflect changes that have been implemented at the state
level since EPA fully approved the I/M program on August 16, 2001. The
submittal also includes a demonstration under section 110(l) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) addressing lost emission reductions associated with
the program changes.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0465, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected].
3. Fax: (312) 692-2450.
4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2012-0465. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to section I of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Francisco J. Acevedo, Environmental
Protection Specialist, at (312) 886-6061 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco J. Acevedo, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6061,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. Background
III. What changes have been made to the Wisconsin I/M program?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?
a. Substantive I/M Requirements
b. Performance Evaluation
c. Demonstrating Noninterference With Attainment and Maintenance
Under CAA Section 110(l)
V. What action is EPA proposing to take?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period.
II. Background
The general purpose of motor vehicle I/M programs is to reduce
emissions from in-use motor vehicles in need of repairs and thereby
contribute to state and local efforts to improve air quality and to
attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Wisconsin has operated an I/M program in southeastern Wisconsin
since 1984. The program is presently operating in Kenosha, Milwaukee,
Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Washington and Waukesha Counties.
Initially, all vehicles were inspected by
[[Page 24374]]
measuring tailpipe emission levels. Since July of 2001, all model year
(MY) 1996 and later cars and light trucks have been inspected by
scanning the vehicle's computerized second generation on-board
diagnostic (OBDII) systems. EPA fully approved Wisconsin's I/M program
on August 16, 2001, (66 FR 42949) including the program's legal
authority and administrative requirements found in sections 100.20 and
285.30 of the Wisconsin Statutes and Chapters NR 485 and Trans 131 of
the Wisconsin Administrative Code. As of July 2008, the program dropped
tailpipe testing entirely and inspected all vehicles by scanning the
OBDII systems. This change was the result of statutory changes in the
State's 2007-2009 biennial budget which exempted model years of
vehicles not Federally required to be equipped with the OBDII
technology (MY 1995 and earlier cars and light trucks and MY 2006 and
earlier heavy trucks).
III. What changes have been made to the Wisconsin I/M program?
The Wisconsin I/M SIP revision submitted on June 7, 2012, reflects
several changes to the approved program. The most significant changes
to the Wisconsin I/M program took effect beginning on July 2008 and
include:
The elimination of I/M program testing requirements for
non-OBDII equipped vehicles. This change impacted MY 1968 through 1995
vehicles. These vehicles were previously subject to tailpipe testing.
The elimination of I/M program testing requirements for
gasoline vehicles with gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) between 8,500
to 10,000 pounds (lbs). This change impacted MY 1996 through 2006
vehicles. Previously, all vehicles up to 10,000 lbs. were subject to
testing.
The addition of I/M program testing requirements for
gasoline vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 to 14,000 lbs. This change
impacted MY 2007 and later vehicles.
The addition of I/M program testing requirements for
diesel vehicles with a GVWR up to 14,000 lbs. This change impacted MY
2007 and later vehicles.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The purpose of adding I/M testing requirements for heavier
gasoline and diesel vehicles was to offset any lost emission
reductions from the elimination of tailpipe testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the changes discussed above, the June 7, 2012,
submittal included a number of minor revisions to the program that do
not have a significant impact on overall program operations or the
emissions reductions associated with it. A full list of the changes
submitted by Wisconsin for EPA approval include: Revisions to Section
100.20, Wisconsin Statutes (2001 Wisconsin Act 16, published August 31,
2001; 2003 Wisconsin Act 220, published April 22, 2003; 2005 Wisconsin
Act 49, published October 27, 2005; 2007 Wisconsin Act 20, published
October 26, 2007; 2009 Wisconsin Act 228, published May 19, 2010).
Revisions to Section 285.30, Wisconsin Statutes (2003 Wisconsin Act
192, published April 21, 2004; 2007 Wisconsin Act 20, published October
26, 2007; 2007 Wisconsin Act 33, published December 3, 2007; 2009
Wisconsin Act 157, published March 24, 2010; 2009 Wisconsin Act 311,
published May 26, 2010). Revisions to Wisconsin Administrative Code,
Chapter NR 485 (Clearinghouse Rule CR 05-072 effective April 1, 2006;
Clearinghouse Rule CR 10-049 effective December 1, 2010). Revisions to
Wisconsin Administrative Code, Chapter Trans 131 (Clearinghouse Rule CR
01-121 effective April 1, 2002; Clearinghouse Rule CR 07-114 effective
July 1, 2008; Clearinghouse Rule CR 10-088 effective January 1, 2011).
To support the changes outlined above, the revision also included a
summary of the MOVES2010a modeling inputs used to calculate program
benefits; a demonstration for meeting the modeling requirements for
EPA's alternate low enhanced I/M performance standard; a section 110(l)
demonstration that includes offset emission credits; and an emissions
inventory evaluation by Sonoma Technology, Inc. WDNR held a public
hearing on the Wisconsin I/M SIP revision on May 7, 2012, in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin and allowed for written public comments until May 11, 2012.
Full copies of the SIP revision are located in EPA's docket.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?
a. Substantive I/M Requirements
EPA's requirements for basic and enhanced I/M programs are found in
40 CFR part 51, subpart S. The I/M SIP revision submitted by Wisconsin
must be consistent with these requirements and must meet EPA's
requirements for enforceability and section 110(l) requirements of the
CAA. The specific aspects of I/M affected by the submitted revisions to
the Wisconsin I/M program include vehicle coverage and exemptions, test
procedures and standards, test equipment, waivers and compliance,
enforcement against contractors, inspector training and licensing or
certification, and the performance standard evaluation.
1. Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR 51.356
Under 40 CFR 51.356, the performance standard for enhanced I/M
programs (including alternate low enhanced programs) assumes coverage
of all MY 1968 and later light duty vehicles and trucks up to 8,500
pounds GVWR, and includes vehicles operating on all fuel types.
Vehicles registered or required to be registered within the I/M program
area boundaries, and fleets primarily operated within the I/M program
area boundaries and belonging to the covered model years and vehicle
classes comprise the subject vehicles. Under EPA regulations, other
levels of coverage may be approved if the necessary emission reductions
are achieved. The Wisconsin I/M program originally approved in the SIP
by EPA, required testing of MY 1968 and later gasoline vehicles with a
GVWR up to 10,000 lbs. Vehicles were first subject to the requirements
when the vehicles were two model years old and every two years
thereafter. The I/M SIP revision amends these provisions to eliminate
emission inspection of vehicles MY 1995 and earlier, and exempts from
testing off-road utility vehicles, lightweight utility vehicles, and
low-speed vehicles. The I/M SIP revision adds emission inspection
requirements for vehicles MY 2007 and later with a GVWR up to 14,000
lbs., while limiting emission inspection of vehicles MY 2006 and
earlier to only those with a GVWR up to 8,500 lbs. Finally, the I/M SIP
revision adds emission inspection of vehicles MY 2007 and later that
are powered by diesel fuel. Under the revised requirements, vehicles
are first subject to the requirements when vehicles are four model
years old and every two years thereafter. However, as described in
section IV.b below, EPA concludes that the state has demonstrated that
it meets the alternate low enhanced performance standards with the
revised program changes. Thus, the changes in vehicle coverage under
the revised requirements are acceptable under 40 CFR 51.356.
2. Test Procedures-Standards--40 CFR 51.357
Under 40 CFR 51.357, I/M programs must establish and implement
written test procedures and pass/fail standards for each model year and
vehicle type. The Wisconsin I/M program originally approved in the SIP
by EPA already contains detailed procedures for connecting to the OBDII
system in 1996 and newer vehicles, information on
[[Page 24375]]
readiness codes for OBDII tests, and pass/fail standards for OBDII
equipped vehicles. Under the revised requirements Wisconsin establishes
OBDII as the primary testing method and eliminates the previously
established idle and transient tailpipe testing methods. The changes
repeal references in the requirements relating to these now eliminated
testing methods including emission equipment specifications and
inspection requirements. In addition, the revised requirements
eliminate the evaporative emission test also known as the ``gas cap
test'', which was previously required but is no longer necessary with
OBDII technology. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of
40 CFR 51.357 and 40 CFR 51.358 of the Federal I/M regulation.
3. Test Equipment--40 CFR 51.358
Computerized test systems are required for performing any
measurement on subject vehicles. The Federal I/M regulation requires
that the state SIP submittal include written technical specifications
for all test equipment used in the program. The specifications must
describe the analysis process, the necessary test equipment, the
required features, and written acceptance testing criteria and
procedures. The Wisconsin I/M program originally approved in the SIP by
EPA already contains detailed technical specifications for program test
equipment that mirror EPA's requirements and guidance. As mentioned
before, the revised changes repeal references in the requirements
relating to idle and transient tailpipe testing methods, including
emission equipment specifications and inspection requirements retaining
the requirements and specifications for OBDII testing. This part of the
submittal continues to meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.358 of the
Federal I/M regulation.
4. Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR 51.360
The Federal I/M regulation allows for the issuance of a waiver,
which is a form of compliance with the program requirements that allows
a motorist to comply without meeting the applicable test standards. An
expenditure of at least $450 in repairs, adjusted annually to reflect
the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as compared to the CPI for
1989, is required in order to qualify for a waiver in enhanced I/M
areas. An expenditure of at least $75 for pre-1981 vehicles and $200
for 1981 and newer vehicles is required in order to qualify for a
waiver in basic I/M areas. Waivers can only be issued after a vehicle
has failed a retest performed after all qualifying repairs have been
made. Any available warranty coverage must be used to obtain repairs
before expenditures can be counted toward the cost limit. Tampering
related repairs must not be applied toward the cost limit. Repairs must
be appropriate to the cause of the test failure. Under the I/M program
approved in the SIP, Wisconsin established waiver limits in section
110.20(13) of the Wisconsin Statutes and in NR 485.045(1) requiring an
expenditure of at least $75 for pre-1981 vehicles and $200 for 1981 and
newer vehicles in order to qualify for a waiver in Sheboygan County and
an expenditure of at least $450 in repairs, adjusted annually to
reflect the change in the CPI as compared to the CPI for 1989, as
established by the EPA, for the remaining I/M counties. Sheboygan
County had a lower repair cost limits since its nonattainment
classification established in 1992 was at a lower level than that for
the other six counties. In the Wisconsin I/M SIP revision, the
requirements have expanded the coverage of the inflation adjusted
repair cost limit in NR 485.045 to all counties subject to the I/M
program and to vehicles with OBDII systems, thereby raising the lower
limits for Sheboygan County. In addition, the revision clarifies that
to obtain a waiver of compliance on the basis of statutory repair cost
limit, a vehicle must pass a waiver emission equipment inspection. This
part of the submittal continues to meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.360.
5. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors--40 CFR
51.364 and Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR
51.367
The Federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally
trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections. In addition,
the regulation requires the establishment of minimum penalties for
violations of program rules and procedures that can be imposed against
stations, contactors and inspectors. The state must include in the SIP
the legal authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil
fines, license suspensions and revocations. The Wisconsin I/M program
originally approved in the SIP by EPA already includes the legal
authority that addresses these requirements. However, the Wisconsin I/M
SIP revision includes amendments to the legal authority that also allow
the State to establish methods for emission testing and delivery of
testing services, in addition to the previously established method of a
single contractor. It establishes as the service delivery method a
possibility of contractors who perform the test at their own
facilities, or by subcontracted testing at subcontractors' facilities,
or at self-service facilities where a vehicle owner may test the
vehicle. The revisions expands the inspector training and licensing
requirements to include all employees of any authorized inspection
facility subcontractor and expands the penalty and audit requirements
originally approved by EPA to include other authorized testing
facilities. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR
51.364 and 51.365.
b. Performance Evaluation
As part of the June 7, 2012, I/M SIP revision, WDNR provided an
updated performance evaluation using the EPA's motor vehicle emissions
simulator model, MOVES2010a.\2\ The updated performance evaluation
included a summary report outlining the modeling results and paper
copies of the MOVES2010a modeling input files. The purpose of the
updated performance evaluation is to demonstrate that Wisconsin's
vehicle I/M program, as amended, would continue to meet the Federal
enhanced I/M performance standard in southeast Wisconsin. The results
of WDNR's analysis are summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below, which show
that the emissions reductions achieved by the Wisconsin I/M program, as
amended, are higher than those achieved under the performance
standards. The amended Wisconsin I/M program thus continues to achieve
greater emissions reductions than the Federal model program because the
Wisconsin I/M program includes elements that go beyond Federal I/M
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA announced the release of MOVES2010 in March 2010 (75 FR
9411). EPA subsequently released two minor model revisions:
MOVES2010a in September 2010 and MOVES2010b in April 2012. Both of
these minor revisions enhance model performance and do not
significantly affect the criteria pollutant emissions results from
MOVES2010.
[[Page 24376]]
Table 1--Summary of Results of WDNR's Alternative Low Enhanced Performance Modeling for Six County Milwaukee-
Racine Nonattainment Area (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and Waukesha Counties)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2009 2012 2015
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC \3\ NOX \4\ VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I/M Performance Standard Benefits (grams/ 0.071 0.040 0.039 0.009 0.025 0.004 0.017 0.002
mile)..................................
Actual I/M Program Benefits (grams/mile) 0.134 0.193 0.060 0.097 0.037 0.063 0.027 0.041
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Volatile organic compound.
\4\ Oxides of nitrogen.
Table 2--Summary of Results of WDNR's Alternative Low Enhanced Performance Modeling for Sheboygan County
Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2009 2012 2015
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I/M Performance Standard Benefits (grams/ 0.080 0.044 0.044 0.009 0.030 0.005 0.020 0.002
mile)..................................
Actual I/M Program Benefits (grams/mile) 0.113 0.165 0.065 0.095 0.044 0.069 0.032 0.045
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the I/M SIP revision, EPA finds that WDNR's
performance standard evaluation and use of the alternate low enhanced
I/M performance standard to be acceptable. EPA also finds that the
Wisconsin I/M program, as amended, exceeds the alternate low enhanced
performance standard in both the Milwaukee-Racine and Sheboygan County
nonattainment areas as required under 40 CFR 51.351.
c. Demonstrating Noninterference With Attainment and Maintenance Under
CAA Section 110(l)
Revisions to SIP-approved control measures must meet the
requirements of CAA section 110(l) to be approved by EPA. Section
110(l) states:
``The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171),
or any other applicable requirement of this Act.''
EPA interprets section 110(l) to apply to all requirements of the
CAA and to all areas of the country, whether attainment, nonattainment,
unclassifiable, or maintenance for one or more of the six criteria
pollutants. EPA also interprets section 110(l) to require a
demonstration addressing all pollutants whose emissions and/or ambient
concentrations may change as a result of the SIP revision. In the
absence of an attainment demonstration, to demonstrate no interference
with any applicable NAAQS or requirement of the CAA under section
110(l), EPA believes it is appropriate to allow states to substitute
equivalent emissions reductions to compensate for any change to a SIP
approved program, as long as actual emissions in the air are not
increased. ``Equivalent'' emissions reductions mean reductions which
are equal to or greater than those reductions achieved by the control
measure approved in the active portion of the SIP. In order to show
that compensating emissions reductions are equivalent, modeling or
adequate justification must be provided. The compensating, equivalent
reductions must represent actual, new emissions reductions achieved in
a contemporaneous time frame to the change of the existing SIP control
measure, in order to preserve the status quo level of emission in the
air. In addition to being contemporaneous, the equivalent emissions
reductions must also be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and
surplus to be approved into the SIP.
The Wisconsin I/M SIP revision includes a 110(l) demonstration that
uses equivalent emissions reductions to compensate for emission
reduction losses resulting from changes to the SIP approved I/M program
in southeast Wisconsin. The submittal indicates that WDNR used the
latest version of EPA's motor vehicle emissions model program,
MOVES2010a, to estimate the emissions effects of the program changes.
Based on our review of the information provided, EPA finds that WDNR
used reasonable methods and appropriate models in estimating the
emissions effects of the program changes. WDNR's MOVES modeling shows
that the changes to the Wisconsin I/M program result in fewer
reductions than would have otherwise been obtained from the pre-2008 I/
M program approved in the SIP by EPA. Table 3 below summarizes WDNR's
emissions calculations comparing the current program to the SIP
approved I/M program in units of tons per summer weekday (tpswd) and
highlights the emissions difference that needs to be addressed as part
of the 110(l) demonstration.
Table 3--(SIP I/M Program vs. Current I/M Program)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIP I/M program Revised I/M Emissions
------------------ program difference
Year -----------------------------------
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009...................................................... 4.55 6.53 3.47 5.59 1.08 0.94
2012...................................................... 3.55 4.92 2.31 3.97 1.24 0.95
2015...................................................... 2.59 3.14 1.76 2.66 0.83 0.48
2018...................................................... 1.88 2.06 1.46 1.85 0.42 0.21
2022...................................................... 1.59 1.49 1.27 1.35 0.32 0.14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 24377]]
The Wisconsin I/M program reduces emissions of VOC and
NOX. VOC and NOX are contributors to the
formation of ground-level ozone and fine particular matter. Thus, the
increase in VOC and NOX needs to be offset with equivalent
(or greater) emissions reductions from another control measure in order
to demonstrate non-interference with the 8-hour ozone and particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. Although the program also results in
carbon monoxide (CO) emissions reductions, substitute CO emissions
reductions are not needed for this demonstration, because southeast
Wisconsin is attaining the CO NAAQS and CO levels in the area are well
below the standard. WDNR has estimated that the 10.13 tpswd of CO lost
from the I/M program changes in 2012, the year where the amended
changes have the greatest emission impact, represent only 0.98 percent
of the total CO emissions inventory in the region and it is unlikely
that the amendments to the Wisconsin I/M program will interfere with
the area's ability to continue to attain the CO NAAQS.
To address the projected loss of VOC and NOX emission
reductions, WDNR reviewed its records of permitted emissions sources in
southeast Wisconsin and identified those sources that have ceased
operation since the Wisconsin I/M program changes have taken place.
WDNR identified eleven facilities (See table 4) in the 6 County
Milwaukee-Racine (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and
Waukesha Counties) and Sheboygan County nonattainment areas that have
permanently closed and have expired permits that have been revoked. The
expiration and revocation of these sources' permits allows the State to
use the emission credits associated with them for other purposes under
the SIP and makes such reductions permanent and enforceable. WDNR
accounted for 506.47 tons of VOC per year and 72.71 tons of
NOX per year based on maximum annual reported emissions from
2005 through 2009.
Table 4--NOX and VOC Emissions From Closed Facilities in Southeast Wisconsin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission reductions
Name FID Date closed -------------------------------
VOC (tons) NOX (tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INPRO CORPORATION............................... 268165150 06/30/09 21.33 0.00
PHOENIX COLOR CORPORATION....................... 241227910 08/31/11 07.36 0.08
MIDWEST COMPOSITE TECHNOLOGIES, INC............. 268270750 12/31/10 19.26 01.28
ROCK TENN CONVERTING COMPANY.................... 241017920 06/30/11 24.35 0.98
CHARTER WIRE DIVISION COMPANY................... 241041130 12/31/09 37.70 0.00
GREDE FOUNDRIES INC.--MILWAUKEE ALLOY........... 241027600 11/30/07 34.90 1.84
MILWAUKEE GRAY IRON, LLC........................ 241006370 12/31/08 53.50 31.29
DELPHI ENERGY & CHASSIS SYSTEMS................. 241045750 06/10/10 0.76 19.73
VIASYSTEMS MILWAUKEE, INC....................... 241116700 01/01/09 19.10 3.44
S.C JOHNSON & SON-WAXDALE/POLYMER............... 252236380 04/01/10 11.40 4.26
MOMENTIVE SPECIALITY CHEMICALS, INC. (LAWTER 230089090 03/27/09 276.81 9.81
INTERNATIONAL, INC.)...........................
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL SIP CREDITS FROM SHUTDOWN FACILITIES.. .............. .............. 506.47 72.71
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, EPA policy allows for substitution between VOC and
NOX emissions in its guidance on reasonable further
progress. This guidance recommends that states assume, as an
approximation, that equivalent percent changes in the area's inventory
for the respective pollutant yield an equivalent change in ozone
levels. For example, decreasing area NOX emissions by 3
percent would have the same effect as decreasing area VOC emissions by
3 percent. Stated another way, if an area has twice as many tons of
NOX emissions as VOC emissions, then 2 tons of
NOX emissions would be assumed to have the same effect on
ozone as 1 ton of VOC emissions. Following this approach WDNR used a 4
to 1 NOX to VOC conversion ratio based on a top-down
evaluation performed by Sonoma Technology, Inc. and outlined in a
report dated May 2011, entitled ``A Top-Down Emissions Inventory
Evaluation for the Upper Midwest'' using 2005 and 2008 emissions
inventories provided by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium.
Table 5 below summarizes WDNR's I/M emissions make-up
demonstration. The table specifically highlights the annual emissions
shortfall that has taken place since the Wisconsin I/M program changes
occurred and outlines the amount of VOC and NOX emission
credits that are being used to cover the shortfall using the VOC to
NOX substitution approach discussed above. Based on the use
of permanent, enforceable, contemporaneous, surplus emissions
reductions achieved through the shutdown of permitted emissions
sources, EPA believes that the revisions to the Wisconsin I/M program
do not interfere with southeast Wisconsin's ability to demonstrate
compliance with the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.
Table 5--I/M Emissions Make-Up Demonstration
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOVES emissions SIP credits from Trading VOC Revised SIP Difference
shortfall shutdown emissions for redits from (shortfall--Credits)
------------------ facilities NOX emissions shutdown \6\
Year ------------------ \5\ facilities ---------------------
VOC NOX ------------------------------------
(tons) tons) VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
(tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009...................................................... 341.18 302.15 455.66 63.60 70.00 280.00 385.66 343.60 -44.47 -41.45
2012...................................................... 394.45 306.29 506.47 72.71 70.00 280.00 436.47 352.71 -42.02 -46.42
2015...................................................... 262.29 154.04 506.47 72.71 70.00 280.00 436.47 352.71 -174.18 -198.66
2018...................................................... 134.04 66.46 506.47 72.71 70.00 280.00 436.47 352.71 -302.43 -286.25
[[Page 24378]]
2022...................................................... 103.41 45.37 506.47 72.71 70.00 280.00 436.47 352.71 -333.05 -307.34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 4:1 VOC to NOX Ratio (i.e., 1 ton of VOC = 4 tons of NOX).
\6\ Negative numbers indicate that the emissions shortfall has been adequately covered.
EPA also examined whether the amendments to the approved I/M
program in southeast Wisconsin have interfered with attainment of other
air quality standards. Southeast Wisconsin is designated attainment for
all other standards including sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. EPA
has no reason to believe that the amendments to the approved I/M
program in southeast Wisconsin have caused or will cause the area to
become nonattainment for any of these pollutants. In addition, EPA
believes that the amendments to the approved I/M program in southeast
Wisconsin will not interfere with the area's ability to meet any other
CAA requirement.
Based on the above discussion and the state's 100(l) demonstration,
EPA believes that the changes to the Wisconsin I/M program would not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of any of the NAAQS in both
the Milwaukee-Racine and Sheboygan County nonattainment areas and would
not interfere with any other applicable requirement of the CAA, and
thus, are approvable under CAA section 110(l).
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the revisions to the Wisconsin ozone
SIP submitted on June 7, 2012, concerning the I/M program in southeast
Wisconsin. EPA finds that the revisions meet all applicable
requirements and will not interfere with reasonable further progress or
attainment of any of the NAAQS.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 rule 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, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 12, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2013-09536 Filed 4-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P