[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4426-4429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02352]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0496; FRL-9989-28-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: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
disapprove 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 proposing to disapprove
Wisconsin's maintenance plans 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: Comments must be received on or before March 18, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0496 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
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. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What actions is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the State's request?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What actions is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to disapprove Wisconsin's August 15, 2016, request
to redesignate the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area
to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard because the Chicago
nonattainment area continues to violate this standard based on the most
recent three years (2015-2017) of quality-assured, certified air
quality monitoring data. Because this area continues to violate the
2008 ozone NAAQS, we are also proposing to disapprove the ozone
maintenance plans and MVEBs included in the State's submittal.
II. What is the background for these actions?
EPA has determined that ground-level ozone is detrimental to human
health. On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS
of 0.075 parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
is attained in an area when the 3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration is equal to or less
than 0.075 ppm, when truncated after the thousandth decimal place, at
all of the ozone monitoring sites in the area. See 40 CFR 50.15 and
appendix P to 40 CFR part 50.
Ground-level ozone is generally not emitted directly by sources.
Rather, emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) react in the presence of sunlight, particularly
under warm conditions, to form ground-level ozone, as a secondary
pollutant, along with other secondary compounds. NOX and VOC
are ``ozone precursors.'' Reduction of peak ground-level ozone
concentrations is achieved through controlling VOC and NOX
emissions.
Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(1)(B)
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to designate as nonattainment
any areas that are violating the NAAQS, based on the most recent three
years of quality-assured ozone monitoring data. The Chicago
nonattainment area was designated as a Marginal nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS effective July 20, 2012. See 77 FR 34221 (June 11,
2012).
On May 4, 2016 (81 FR 26697), in accordance with section
181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the provisions of the SIP Requirements Rule
(40 CFR 51.1103), EPA determined that the Chicago nonattainment area
failed to attain the
[[Page 4427]]
2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2015, Marginal area nonattainment
deadline, and reclassified the area from Marginal to Moderate
nonattainment. EPA's determination was based upon three years of
complete, quality-assured and certified data for the 2012-2014 time
period.
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows redesignation of a
nonattainment area to attainment of the NAAQS provided that: (1) The
Administrator [of EPA] determines that the area has attained the NAAQS;
(2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation
plan for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP, applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable emission
reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan
for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA;
and (5) the state containing the area has met all requirements
applicable to the area for the purposes of redesignation under section
110 and part D of the CAA.
On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents:
1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,''
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division,
June 18, 1990;
2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (the ``Calcagni
Memorandum'');
5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in
Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28,
1992;
6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation of
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum
from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch,
August 17, 1993;
7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
On or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October
14, 1994; and
10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S.
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May
10, 1995.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the State's request?
EPA is proposing to disapprove Wisconsin's request to redesignate
the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area because the
nonattainment area continues to violate the 2008 ozone standard based
on quality-assured, certified ozone monitoring data for 2015-2017.
Preliminary monitoring data for 2018 also indicate that the area
continues to violate the 2008 ozone standard. The Chicago nonattainment
area fails to meet the critical air quality requirement of section
107(d)(3)(E)(1) of the CAA. The basis for EPA's proposed disapproval of
the redesignation request is discussed in more detail below.
A. Has the Chicago area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS?
For redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). An area may be considered to
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS if there are no violations of the NAAQS, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P of part 50,
based on the most recent three consecutive years of complete, quality-
assured air quality data for all monitoring sites in the area. To
attain this standard, the three-year average of the annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations (ozone design
values) at each monitor must not exceed 0.075 ppm. The air quality data
must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58
and recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS). The 2015-2017 ozone
monitoring data considered here meet these certification criteria.
As part of the State's August 15, 2016, redesignation request,
Wisconsin considered monitoring data for 2013-2015, which showed
attainment of the 2008 ozone standard. However, since submittal of the
State's redesignation request, quality-assured and certified ozone data
have become available for the 2014-2016 and 2015-2017 time periods.
These data may not be ignored in the review of Wisconsin's
redesignation request.
The annual fourth-highest 8-hour ozone concentrations and the 3-
year average of these concentrations (monitoring site ozone design
values) for each monitoring site in the Chicago area are summarized in
Table 1.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 4428]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP15FE19.001
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
The most recent 3-year ozone design value, for 2015-2017, is 0.078
ppm,\1\ which violates the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This design value
demonstrates that the Chicago nonattainment area has not attained the
2008 ozone standard. In addition, preliminary monitoring data for 2018
indicate that the Chicago nonattainment area will continue to violate
the standard when that data is considered. Therefore, Wisconsin's ozone
redesignation request fails to meet the first, and most important,
criterion for the approval of a redesignation request: Attainment of
the 2008 ozone standard throughout the entire nonattainment area. For
this reason, we propose to disapprove the State's request for
redesignation to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The monitor ozone design value for the monitor with the
highest 3-year averaged concentration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Has Wisconsin submitted an approvable ozone maintenance plan and
approvable motor vehicle emissions budgets?
To be approvable, an ozone maintenance plan, in part, must
demonstrate that the ozone standard will be maintained in the ozone
nonattainment area for at least 10 years after EPA approves the state's
ozone redesignation request. A critical component of ozone maintenance
plans is an ozone attainment emissions inventory documenting the VOC
and NOX emissions inventory for the period in which the area
has attained the ozone standard. The ozone maintenance demonstration
usually involves the demonstration that future (during the 10 years
after redesignation) VOC and NOX emissions will be at or
below the level of emissions that lead to attainment of the standard.
Wisconsin's ozone redesignation request purports to contain such an
ozone maintenance demonstration; however, because the Chicago area
continues to violate the 2008 ozone standard, we cannot conclude that
Wisconsin has developed an acceptable attainment year emissions
inventory. Absent a demonstration that the maintenance plan inventory
is sufficient to maintain attainment of the standard, EPA may not
approve the ozone maintenance demonstration portion of the ozone
maintenance plan submitted by the State.
Since the estimation of the VOC and NOX MVEBs depends on
the
[[Page 4429]]
determination of mobile source emissions that, along with other
emissions in the nonattainment area, provide for attainment of the
ozone standard, and since the Chicago nonattainment area continues to
violate the 2008 ozone standard, we find that Wisconsin's VOC and
NOX MVEBs are also not acceptable.
EPA is proposing to disapprove Wisconsin's maintenance plan and
MVEBs for these reasons.
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 not expected to be 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 requirements as not
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Similarly, disapproval of a
redesignation request only affects the legal designation of an area
under the CAA and does not create any new requirements. 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
requirement and a redesignation request, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the CAA.
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
requirement and redesignation request.
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.
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: December 20, 2018.
James O. Payne,
Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-02352 Filed 2-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P