[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