
[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 
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 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, 
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.

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


