[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53309-53311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19025]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0704; FRL-9950-54-Region 5]
Wisconsin; Approval/Disapproval of Interstate Transport
Requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is partially
approving and partially disapproving elements of State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submission from Wisconsin regarding the infrastructure
requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural
components of each state's air quality management program are adequate
to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. This action
pertains specifically to infrastructure requirements concerning
interstate transport provisions for which Wisconsin made a SIP
submission that, among other things, certified that the existing SIP
was sufficient to meet the interstate transport requirements for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
DATES: This final rule is effective on September 12, 2016.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0704. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
through www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in
the ``For Further Information Contact'' section for additional
availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, 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) 886-9401, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever
[[Page 53310]]
``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary
information section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
II. What action did EPA propose on the SIP submission?
III. What is our response to comments received on the proposed
rulemaking?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
This rulemaking addresses CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements
in an infrastructure SIP submission addressing the applicable
infrastructure requirements with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) on
June 20, 2013, and clarified in a letter dated January 28, 2015.
The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type
arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1),
states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter
period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision
thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the
``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP
submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not
conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new
or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that
``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address. EPA commonly refers to
such state plans as ``infrastructure SIPs.''
This rulemaking takes action on two CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
requirements which apply to these submissions. In particular, section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any
source or other type of emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS (``prong
one''), or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS (``prong two''),
by any another state. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires that
infrastructure SIPs include provisions prohibiting any source or other
type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures
required to prevent significant deterioration (PSD) of air quality
(``prong three'') and to protect visibility (``prong four'') in another
state. This rulemaking addresses prongs one and two of this CAA
section. The majority of the other infrastructure elements were
approved in rulemakings on September 11, 2015 (80 FR 54725).
II. What action did EPA propose on the SIP submission?
The proposed rulemaking associated with today's final action was
published on March 16, 2016 (81 FR 14025). In that action, EPA proposed
to disapprove the Wisconsin SIP for the prong two requirement because
the WDNR SIP submission did not provide an adequate technical analysis
demonstrating that the state's SIP contained adequate provisions
prohibiting emissions that will significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with the 2008 ozone NAAQS in any other state
and because EPA's most recent modeling indicated that emissions from
Wisconsin were projected to contribute to projected downwind
maintenance receptors in another state. EPA also proposed to approve
the Wisconsin SIP for the prong one requirement because, although WDNR
did not provide information or analyses explaining why existing SIP
provisions are adequate to prevent significant contribution to
nonattainment in downwind states, EPA's independent modeling presented
in the Notice of Data Availability and the Cross-State Air Pollution
Update Rule indicated that Wisconsin emissions were not linked to any
projected downwind nonattainment receptors. Therefore, EPA proposed to
find that the Wisconsin SIP had adequate provisions to prevent such
significant contribution to nonattainment for the 2008 ozone standard.
III. What is our response to comments received on the proposed
rulemaking?
During the comment period, which ended on April 15, 2016, EPA did
not receive any comments on the Wisconsin portion of the proposed
notice. Comments pertaining to Ohio and Indiana are addressed in a June
15, 2016 rulemaking (81 FR 38957).
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA, as proposed, is approving prong one and disapproving prong two
of a required infrastructure element with respect to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), interstate transport, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The
approval is based on the June 20, 2013 SIP submission in which
Wisconsin certified that the current SIP is sufficient to meet the CAA
requirements. The disapproval portion of this action triggers an
obligation under CAA section 110(c) for EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than two years from the effective
date of this disapproval, if EPA has not approved a SIP revision or
revisions addressing the deficiencies identified in this action. The
disapproval in this action is not tied to attainment planning
requirements and therefore does not start any sanction clocks.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency
may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory
burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on the small entities subject to the rule. This action merely proposes
to disapprove state law as not meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate 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.
[[Page 53311]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children
because it proposes to disapprove a state rule.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by
this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or
indigenous populations.
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 rule 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 October 11, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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, Ozone.
Dated: August 1, 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 52.2591 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2591 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.
* * * * *
(g) Approval--In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. For
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), we are approving prong one and disapproving prong
two. We are not taking action on the prevention of significant
deterioration requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II),
and (J) and the state board requirements of (E)(ii). We will address
these requirements in a separate action.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-19025 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P