[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