[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 86 (Monday, May 5, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24380-24383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-11628]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WI66-01-7242; FRL-5821-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 15, 1994, the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) submitted an overwhelming transport petition to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting
temporary suspension of the automatic reclassification to Serious
Nonattainment and the delay of the attainment date (from 1996 to 2007)
for three ozone Moderate Nonattainment Counties (Manitowoc, Sheboygan,
and Kewaunee). However, on August 26, 1996, the counties of Sheboygan
and Kewaunee were redesignated to attainment. As a result, this
overwhelming transport request is being applied only to Manitowoc
County. The petition is supported with results from photochemical grid
modeling. Approval of the temporary attainment date delay will suspend
the automatic reclassification of Manitowoc County from Moderate to
Serious. Final approval of the new attainment date is dependent upon
the results of an attainment demonstration for both the upwind and
downwind areas. Approval of the attainment date delay petition does not
preclude the State from submitting a request for redesignation to
attainment for the county, based on 3 years of clean air quality
monitoring data.
DATES: Comments on this request and on the proposed EPA action must be
received by June 4, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Carlton Nash,
Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of the State's submittal and other information are available
for inspection during normal business hours at the following location.
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Tonielli, Air Programs Branch,
Regulation Development Section (AR-18J), United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6068.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On November 15, 1994, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
submitted a petition to the EPA requesting temporary suspension of the
automatic reclassification to serious nonattainment and the delay of
the attainment date (from 1996 to 2007) for 3 ozone Moderate
Nonattainment Counties (Manitowoc, Sheboygan, and Kewaunee). On May 15,
1996, the WDNR submitted a request for redesignation to attainment for
the three moderate nonattainment areas based on 3 years of clean air
quality data. On August 26, 1996, the counties of Sheboygan and
Kewaunee were redesignated to attainment (61 FR 43668-43675). Manitowoc
County was not redesignated to attainment due to violations of the
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) during the summer
of 1996. As a result, this overwhelming transport request will be
applied solely to Manitowoc County.
[[Page 24381]]
The November 15, 1994 petition from WDNR was submitted in response to
EPA's September 1, 1994 guidance policy for areas affected by
overwhelming transport. That Guidance, entitled ``Ozone Attainment
Dates for Areas Affected by Overwhelming Transport'', describes the
rationale used by EPA to temporarily revise the attainment date for
areas affected by overwhelming transport, without bumping them up to a
higher classification. In order for an area to qualify for an
extension, the State must clearly demonstrate through modeling that
transport from an area with a later attainment date makes it
``practicably impossible'' for the area in question to attain the
standard by its attainment date. The policy further states that
``modeling must support the new attainment date, which should be as
expeditious as practicable, but no later than the attainment date of
the area causing the delay.'' The State must specify the new attainment
date in its SIP.
The September 1, 1994 guidance policy further states that ``an area
can request, and EPA can approve, an attainment date extension separate
from the attainment demonstration''. In other words, an area can be
granted a temporary delay in its attainment date by demonstrating
overwhelming transport even though attainment demonstrations for upwind
and downwind areas are not yet complete. The policy goes on to state
that ``EPA will take rulemaking action on such requests to temporarily
suspend the original attainment date. Final approval of an attainment
date extension--with a newly specified attainment date--will depend on
the results of the attainment demonstrations for both the upwind and
downwind areas.'' Wisconsin is working toward completion of an
attainment demonstration in conjunction with Illinois, Indiana, and
Michigan, following the Phase I/Phase II Ozone Transport Assessment
Group approach outlined in EPA's March 2, 1995 guidance memorandum from
Mary Nichols entitled ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations''. The goal of
this approach is to reduce the amount of transported ozone across the
eastern United States through the implementation of regional, as well
as urban scale, emission reductions. The attainment demonstration for
the Lake Michigan States, including Wisconsin, is due in mid-1997.
II. Review of Modeling Demonstration to Support Attainment Date
Extension
The demonstration of the overwhelming transport was based on a
protocol, dated September 23, 1994, that was developed by the Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) for both the Western Michigan
and Northeastern Wisconsin Moderate Nonattainment Areas petitioning for
attainment date extensions. LADCO is an organization which provides
technical support and guidance to the states of Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, and Wisconsin.
Methodology
The modeling was performed using the Urban Airshed Model-Variable
(UAM-V). The UAM-V model was approved by EPA for regulatory use in the
Lake Michigan region. The model used boundary ozone conditions based on
observed data. Wind field data were based on predictions from the
CALRAMS prognostic meteorological model. Emissions were based on the
Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) inventory. Details of the modeling
input are included in the Technical Support Document and in the State
submittal.
The modeling analysis consisted of two basic steps:
(1) UAM-V runs were used to demonstrate the effectiveness of
mandatory control measures using 1996 Clean Air Act control measures
and growth (Strategy 1). This strategy contains a variety of emission
reduction measures for both stationary and mobile sources, as well as
for formulation of gasoline. Runs were conducted for four 1991 LMOS
episodes: (1) June 26-28, (2) July 17-19, (3) August 25-26, and (4)
June 20-21.
(2) When step 1 failed to show attainment in the Moderate
Nonattainment areas, the State demonstrated overwhelming transport by
determining the contribution made by the three Moderate Nonattainment
counties to the peak ozone concentrations seen in the Wisconsin
Moderate Nonattainment Areas. This was done by repeating Step 1 while
zeroing out the NOX and anthropogenic volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions in the Moderate Nonattainment area and running
UAM-V for LMOS episodes 1 and 3. Episodes 1 and 3 were chosen because
the highest predicted and observed ozone concentrations in northeastern
Wisconsin occurred during those episodes. Additionally, the predominant
wind flow during these two episodes was from the southwest, which
allowed an examination of transport from the upwind Chicago and
Milwaukee severe nonattainment areas.
Table 1.--Predicted Ozone Concentrations
[Parts per billion]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domain-wide peak WI moderate
--------------------------------------- nonattainment area peak
-------------------------
Basecase Step 1 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Episode 1:
June 26.................................... \1\ 165 \2\ 158 \3\ 158 \4\ 137 137
June 27.................................... 151 143 143 102 104
June 28.................................... 142 134 134 105 106
Episode 2:
July 17.................................... 148 141 ........... 98 ...........
July 18.................................... 162 157 ........... 109 ...........
July 19.................................... 160 155 ........... 88 ...........
Episode 3:
August 25.................................. 128 127 127 93 92
August 26.................................. 158 150 150 136 \5\ 138
Episode 4:
June 20.................................... 137 132 ........... 73 ...........
June 21.................................... 126 123 ........... 68 ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Basecase--includes no emission reduction strategies.
[[Page 24382]]
\1\ The maximum Basecase ozone concentration predicted for the modeling domain (the area being modeled, which
includes upwind areas as well as the moderate nonattainment areas), 165 ppb, occurred during Episode 1, and
was located just east of Milwaukee, over Lake Michigan.
\2\ The maximum domain-wide Strategy 1 ozone concentration, 158 ppb, occurred during Episode 1, and was located
just east of Milwaukee, over Lake Michigan.
\3\ The maximum domain-wide Strategy 1 ozone concentration with Wisconsin Moderate Area emissions zeroed out was
158 ppb, occurred during Episode 1, and located just east of Milwaukee, over Lake Michigan.
\4\ The maximum WI Moderate Nonattainment Area ozone concentration with Strategy 1 emissions was 137 ppb and
occurred during Episode 1. This concentration was predicted in Sheboygan County.
\5\ The maximum WI Moderate Nonattainment Area Strategy 1 ozone concentration with Wisconsin Moderate Area
emissions zeroed out was 138 ppb and occurred during Episode 3. This concentration was predicted in Manitowoc
County.
Results
The numerical results of the step 1 and step 2 modeling are
presented in Table 1. The numbers in the table were taken from plots of
modeled output, (included in the State submittal) showing the spatial
distribution of ozone concentrations for the various episodes and
control assumptions.
Table 1 clearly shows that the domain-wide peak concentrations and
the Moderate Nonattainment Area peak concentrations are unaffected by
emissions from Sheboygan, Manitowoc, and Kewaunee Counties. In each of
the two episodes modeled with zeroed-out emissions for the three
counties, the peak concentrations in those counties remained
essentially unchanged and on a few days, resulted in slightly higher
concentrations.
III. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Public Comment
The State submittal demonstrated that emissions from the Wisconsin
Moderate Nonattainment Area did not contribute to the exceedances
predicted in that area for Episodes 1 and 3. It further demonstrated
that the exceedances are due to transport from upwind areas. Two of the
three counties originally in the moderate nonattainment area have since
been redesignated to attainment based on 3 years of clean air quality
data. Consequently, this petition applies only to Manitowoc County.
Although the modeling analysis submitted by the State examined the
impact of zeroing out emissions from all three counties, the results
from that analysis remain valid now that the petition applies only to
Manitowoc County. In other words, if zeroing out emissions in three
counties had minimal domain-wide or local impact, zeroing out emissions
from one county would also have minimal impact. Therefore, Manitowoc
County could not demonstrate modeled attainment of the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards by the required attainment date, November
15, 1996, due to overwhelming transport from upwind areas that have a
later attainment date of November 15, 2007. Because the upwind areas
(e.g., Chicago and Milwaukee) do not have approved modeling analyses
demonstrating that the WI Moderate Nonattainment Area could show
attainment by a specific date, the EPA is proposing to approve the
request to temporarily allow the Manitowoc County moderate
nonattainment area to use the upwind area's attainment date of November
15, 2007. Approval of a permanent delay of the attainment date will be
dependent on the results of the attainment demonstration due in mid-
1997 for both the upwind and downwind areas, along with the additional
provisions detailed in part II(B) of the attachment to the September 1,
1994, guidance memorandum.
The demonstration made by the State which shows that the current
SIP emission reduction measures would be sufficient to achieve
attainment by the moderate area attainment date but for the
overwhelming amount of transported pollutants into the area is based on
modeling results. Approval of the attainment date delay petition does
not preclude the State from submitting a request for redesignation to
attainment for Manitowoc County based on air quality monitoring data.
Public comments are solicited on EPA'S proposed rulemaking action.
Public comments received by June 4, 1997 will be considered in the
development of EPA's final rulemaking action.
General Provisions
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be considered
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory
requirements.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and
Budget has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866
review.
Regulatory Process
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. Secs. 603 and
604). Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) do not create any new requirements, but simply
approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore,
because the Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements,
I certify that it does not have a significant economic impact on any
small entities.
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Secs. 1532, 1533, and 1535, EPA must undertake
various actions in association with proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to the private sector, or to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of the state implementation plan or plan
revisions approved in this section, the State has elected to adopt the
program provided for under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. The rules
and commitments being approved under this section may bind State,
local, and tribal governments to perform certain actions and also may
ultimately lead to the private sector being required to perform certain
duties. To the extent that the rules and commitments being approved by
this action will impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate upon
the State, local, or tribal governments either as the owner or operator
of a source or as a regulator, or would impose or lead to the
imposition of any mandate upon the private sector, EPA's action will
impose no new requirements; such sources are already subject to these
requirements under State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
[[Page 24383]]
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result
from this action. The EPA has also determined that this action does not
include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the
private sector. Approval of Wisconsin's emissions inventories does not
impose any new requirements or have a significant economic impact on
small entities.
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 July 7, 1997.
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, Ozone, Volatile
organic compounds, Nitrogen oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671(q).
Dated: April 16, 1997.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-11628 Filed 5-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P