[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 133 (Friday, July 10, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41405-41411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14691]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0097; EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0199; EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0200; 
FRL-10011-90-Region 5]


Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Redesignation of the Shoreline 
Sheboygan, WI Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that the 
Shoreline Sheboygan County, Wisconsin area is attaining the 2008 
primary and secondary ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS), and is approving a request from the Wisconsin Department of 
Natural Resources (WDNR) to redesignate the area to attainment for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS because the request meets the statutory requirements 
for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is approving, as a 
revision to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's 
plan for maintaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2032 in the Shoreline 
Sheboygan area. EPA finds adequate and is approving Wisconsin's 2025 
and 2032 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the 
Shoreline Sheboygan area. EPA is also approving Wisconsin's VOC 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) SIP revisions. Finally, 
EPA is approving the Wisconsin SIP as meeting the applicable base year 
inventory requirement, emission statement requirements, VOC RACT 
requirements, motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program 
requirements, and NOX RACT requirements.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 10, 2020.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0097, Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0199, and 
Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0200. All documents in the dockets are 
listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) 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 www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal 
holidays and facility closures due to COVID 19. We recommend that you 
telephone Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-4489 
before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, 
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489, 
svingen.eric@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    This rule approves the February 11, 2020 and April 1, 2020 
submissions from Wisconsin requesting redesignation of the Shoreline 
Sheboygan area to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard. The 
background for this action is discussed in detail in EPA's proposal, 
dated May 13, 2020 (85 FR 28550). In that rulemaking, we noted that, 
under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 ozone NAAQS is 
attained in an area when the 3-year average of the annual fourth 
highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration (i.e., the design 
value) is equal to or less than 0.075 parts per million (ppm), when 
truncated after the thousandth decimal place, at all ozone monitoring 
sites in the area. (See 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50.) 
The level of the 2008 ozone NAAQS is often expressed as 75 parts per 
billion (ppb). Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas 
to attainment if complete, quality-assured data show that the area has 
attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation 
requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). The proposed rule

[[Page 41406]]

provides a detailed discussion of how Wisconsin has met these CAA 
requirements and EPA's rationale for approving the redesignation 
request and related SIP submissions.
    As discussed in the proposed rule, quality-assured and certified 
monitoring data for 2017-2019 show that the area has attained the 2008 
ozone standard, and EPA has determined that the attainment is due to 
permanent and enforceable measures. In the maintenance plan submitted 
for the area, Wisconsin has demonstrated that compliance with the ozone 
standard will be maintained in the area through 2032. As also discussed 
in the proposed rule, Wisconsin has adopted 2025 and 2032 VOC and 
NOX MVEBs for the area that are supported by Wisconsin's 
maintenance demonstration. Finally, EPA is approving the VOC RACT SIP 
revisions included in Wisconsin's February 11, 2020 and April 1, 2020 
submittals, which include Administrative Order AM-20-02 for Kieffer & 
Co. Inc. and Administrative Order AM-20-03 for Kohler Power Systems. 
With these approvals of Wisconsin's SIP submissions, EPA finds that all 
SIP requirements applicable to redesignation are fully approved.
    Per the CAA, upon the effective date of this redesignation, 
nonattainment area requirements cease to apply to this area. More 
specifically, the requirements to submit certain planning SIPs related 
to attainment, including attainment demonstration requirements (the 
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) requirement of section 
172(c)(1) of the CAA, the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and 
attainment demonstration requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and (6) and 
182(b)(1) of the CAA, and the requirement for contingency measures of 
section 172(c)(9) of the CAA), are no longer applicable to the area and 
cease to apply. See 40 CFR 51.1118.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?

    Public comments on the May 13, 2020 proposed rule were due by June 
12, 2020. During the comment period EPA received three comments in 
support of our action, one comment that was not relevant to our action, 
as well as two adverse comments. EPA thanks the commenters for their 
comments. Summaries of the adverse comments and EPA's responses are 
provided below.
    Comment 1: A member of the public shared concerns regarding the 
health effects of ozone. The commenter lists health problems and asks 
whether these problems are occurring in Sheboygan County, and whether 
any occurrence of these problems could be related to ozone. The 
commenter states a belief that ozone standards will continue to 
decrease, and notes that the American Lung Association has supported a 
standard of 60 ppb. The commenter states that the design value for the 
Shoreline Sheboygan area is 75 ppb, which ``can't get any closer'' to 
the level of the 2008 ozone NAAQS at 75 ppb. The commenter references 
the 2015 ozone NAAQS which is set at a level of 70 ppb, alleges that 
``implementation has been postponed by lawsuits and EPA is dragging its 
feet,'' and raises concerns that redesignation of the Shoreline 
Sheboygan area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS would diminish efforts to 
attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The commenter states that Sheboygan County 
needs to do a comprehensive health study, which would motivate 
stakeholders to collaborate in achieving greater reductions in ozone 
levels. Lastly, the commenter congratulates the Sheboygan County 
business community for ``not adding to most of the bad ozone that comes 
from out of state,'' but shares concerns that not enough attention is 
being paid to health issues.
    Response 1: The issues raised by this commenter are largely beyond 
the scope of this action, in which EPA is evaluating the State's 
request to redesignate the area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS under the 
criteria at CAA section 107(d)(3)(E).
    The requirement for EPA to periodically review the NAAQS, and to 
update those standards as necessary, is provided under sections 108 and 
109 of the CAA. As part of the NAAQS review process, EPA conducts an 
analysis of available science, including key science judgements that 
inform the development of risk and exposure assessments. Resulting from 
this process, EPA has promulgated progressively more protective 
standards for ground-level ozone. On March 27, 2008, EPA revised the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS by strengthening the level of the primary and 
secondary standards to 75 ppb (73 FR 16435), and on October 26, 2015, 
EPA further revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by strengthening the level 
of the primary and secondary standards to 70 ppb (80 FR 65292). In this 
action EPA is not reevaluating our March 27, 2008 and October 26, 2015 
actions under CAA sections 108 and 109, in which we reviewed available 
science and revised the ozone standards to levels determined by the 
Administrator to be protective of public health.
    Likewise, the commenter's concerns regarding implementation and 
attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS are not relevant to this 
redesignation for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA also disagrees with the 
commenter's assertion that implementation of the 2015 ozone NAAQS ``has 
been postponed by lawsuits and EPA is dragging its feet.'' On December 
6, 2018, EPA published implementation requirements for the 2015 ozone 
NAAQS, including requirements for attainment demonstrations and 
programs such as nonattainment new source review (NNSR) (83 FR 62998). 
EPA is continuing to implement the 2015 ozone NAAQS according to the 
requirements set forth in that rulemaking, including in the Sheboygan 
County nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, which covers the 
identical geographic area as the Shoreline Sheboygan area for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS. Requirements appropriate for nonattainment areas, such as 
NNSR, will continue to apply in the area because the area will retain 
its nonattainment designation for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    The commenter's inquiry about whether health problems they've 
experienced are related to ozone pollution is also beyond the scope of 
this action, which focuses only on whether the Shoreline Sheboygan area 
has met the requirements for redesignation under CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E).
    Finally, EPA reiterates that according to 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 
ozone NAAQS is attained when the design value in an area is equal to or 
less than 75 ppb. Although the commenter asserts that the Shoreline 
Sheboygan area's design value of 75 ppb ``can't get any closer'' to the 
standard, such a design value nevertheless meets the requirements for 
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA.
    Comment 2: Sheboygan Ozone Reduction Alliance (SORA), a citizen 
group focused on reducing air pollution and advocating for public 
health, provided two reasons for opposing this action.
    First, SORA contends that WDNR has failed to demonstrate that 
reductions in emissions were responsible for reductions in Sheboygan 
County ozone concentrations. The commenter notes that WDNR chose 2011 
and 2017 as the years to be used for nonattainment year and attainment 
year emissions inventories, and the commenter quantifies that between 
2011 and 2017, NOX emissions in the area decreased by 48% 
and VOC emissions in the area decreased by 15%. For the years 2008 
through 2019, the commenter presents a table of design values for the 
area, as

[[Page 41407]]

well as the number of days each year that the daily maximum 8-hour 
average in the area was above the level of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The 
commenter contends that between 2011 and 2017, ozone concentrations did 
not decrease proportionally with emissions reductions. Further, the 
commenter presents a table of the design values for the ten 3-year 
periods occuring between 2008 through 2019, and notes that none of the 
design values for the five 3-year periods occuring between 2011 and 
2017 show attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The commenter writes that 
``although the 2017-2019 design value appears to meet the 2008 NAAQS, 
two of the years used for that design value, 2018 and 2019, are outside 
of the scope of the emission inventory years provided in the request,'' 
and contends that because WDNR did not provide inventories for 2018 or 
2019, it is not possible to determine that the 2017-2019 design value 
was a result of permanent and enforceable reductions. The commenter 
also notes that WDNR's submission included the statement ``Sheboygan 
County sources have little to no ability to influence ozone 
concentrations at monitors in the county,'' and contends that WNDR 
therefore does not demonstrate that the improvement in air quality is 
based on permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. The commenter 
suggests that WDNR consider expanding the nonattainment area, in order 
to manage the regional emissions contributing to violations of the 
ozone standards in Sheboygan County and along Lake Michigan.
    Second, SORA contends that ozone season meteorology deviated 
significantly from historical averages in 2019 and was likely the 
primary contributor to reduced ozone concentrations during the 2019 
ozone season. Specifically, the commenter contends that ``the 2019 
ozone season had important meteorological trends that deviated from 
historical averages for wind direction and temperature.'' The commenter 
notes that high ozone concentrations at the Kohler Andrae monitor are 
``almost always'' associated with southerly winds originating from the 
south-southwest to southeast, and contends that the average wind 
direction in 2019 differed from the average wind direction in 2009 
through 2017. According to the commenter, an increased frequency of 
winds from the north and northeast accounts for a drop in average wind 
direction, and this caused fewer days in 2019 with winds favorable to 
ozone formation. Further, the commenter notes that warm temperatures 
are associated with high ozone formation at the Kohler Andrae monitor, 
and contends that average summer temperature in 2019 was below the 
2008-2018 average. The commenter suggests that lower average 
temperatures indicate fewer days with temperatures conducive to 
increased ozone formation, and notes that WDNR's submittal shows a 
correlation between temperature and ozone concentrations. To illustrate 
these points, the commenter includes four charts displaying data for 
wind direction and temperature. The commenter concludes these points by 
contending that unusual meteorology is ``likely the significant 
contributor to reduced ozone concentrations'' at the Kohler Andrae 
monitor, without which the design value would have been higher. Lastly, 
the commenter states that ozone problems will not be solved through 
redesignation, suggests that regional solutions are required, and hopes 
that coordinated cooperation between stakeholders will lead to improved 
air quality.
    Response 2: As discussed below, EPA finds that approval of 
Wisconsin's request to redesignate the Shoreline Sheboygan area is 
consistent with the requirements of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E).
    First, EPA does not agree that attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
in Sheboygan County was not due to permanent and enforceable reductions 
in emissions, per CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii).\1\ As stated in EPA's 
long-standing guidance on redesignations (see ``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
September 4, 1992), we interpret this provision to mean that 
``[a]ttainment resulting from temporary reductions in emission rates 
(e.g., reduced production or shutdown due to temporary adverse economic 
conditions) or unusually favorable meteorology would not qualify as an 
air quality improvement due to permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions.'' Calcagni Memo at 4. EPA's guidance instructs that the 
showing under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) ``should estimate the 
percent reduction . . . achieved from Federal measures . . . as well as 
control measures that have been adopted and implemented by the State,'' 
and that overall, we must be able to ``reasonably attribute the 
improvement in air quality to emission reductions which are permanent 
and enforceable.'' Id. This cataloguing of permanent and enforceable 
state and Federal measures, along with the estimated reductions in 
precursor emissions that cause ozone pollution which are attributable 
to each measure over the relevant time period, has long been EPA's 
methodology to demonstrate compliance with CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) and has been upheld in court. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 
774 F.3d 383, 393-95 (7th Cir. 2014). As noted by the court in Sierra 
Club, ``the CAA does not require EPA to prove causation to an absolute 
certainty. Rather in accord with its own internal guidance . . . EPA 
had to `reasonably attribute' the drops in ozone to permanent and 
enforceable measures. Only if EPA's path cannot `be reasonably 
discerned,' or if EPA relied on factors `that Congress did not intend 
it to consider' or `fail[ed] to consider an important aspect of the 
problem,' will we conclude that EPA acted arbitrarily or 
capriciously.'' Id. at 396.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The commenter states that they do not support EPA's proposal 
to redesignate the Sheboygan County area because WDNR has failed to 
demonstrate that CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) is met. However, as 
that statutory provision clearly states, the Administrator may not 
promulgate a redesignation of a nonattainment area unless ``the 
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable 
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions.'' On its face, the statute permits EPA to 
not only consider Wisconsin's submittal and demonstration, but also 
any other information the Agency has regarding emission reductions 
in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA applied the same methodology in reviewing Wisconsin's request 
as it did for the areas at issue in the Sierra Club case, and as it has 
for the many redesignated areas across the country over the last three 
decades. In our proposal, we discussed at length the various state and 
Federal promulgated measures and the estimated precursor emission 
reductions impacts attributable to each of those measures. 85 FR at 
28555-58. The commenter does not dispute the permanence or 
enforceability of any of the measures listed by EPA, nor do they refute 
that the measures obtained the estimated reductions cited by EPA. The 
commenter's sole focus was on WDNR's comparison of emission inventories 
for 2011 (a nonattainment year) and 2017 (an attainment year) for 
sources within the Shoreline Sheboygan area. To the extent that the 
commenter is suggesting that the fact that ozone concentrations did not 
decline proportionally to the emissions reductions implemented in the 
Sheboygan County area means that those reductions had no impact on the 
area's attainment, we disagree. Ozone concentrations do not typically 
decline

[[Page 41408]]

proportionally with emissions reductions to both precursors, because 
ozone formation chemistry, which involves photochemical reactions of 
precursor species, is a complex nonlinear process. Therefore, 
reductions of both NOX and VOC precursor emissions are not 
likely to result in a proportional reduction in ozone. However, 
selectively reducing the key anthropogenic precursor emissions that are 
driving ozone formation, generally results in reduced ozone. As noted 
by the commenter, meteorology and emissions of ozone precursors from 
outside the nonattainment area both impact ozone concentrations in the 
Sheboygan County area and can cause some variability from year to year. 
But the influence of these factors does not negate the fact that the 
permanent and enforceable precursor emission reductions from stationary 
and mobile sources in Wisconsin and upwind states that contribute ozone 
to the Sheboygan County area--all of which we pointed to in our 
proposal--have in the aggregate caused the area to come into attainment 
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    We also find no fault with Wisconsin's use of 2017 emissions within 
the nonattainment area (i.e., the attainment inventory) for purposes of 
illustrating the reduction in emissions in the area over time (from 
2011 to 2017). We do not agree with the commenter that ``it is not 
possible to determine that the 2017-2019 design value was the result of 
emission reductions'' because Wisconsin did not provide emission 
inventories for 2018 and 2019. The State's selection of one year of 
emissions during a design value period indicating nonattainment and one 
year of emissions during a design value period indicating attainment 
showed quite simply that emissions had decreased substantially within 
the area during that time period.
    We do not agree with the commenter that it is appropriate or 
necessary to expand the boundaries of the Shoreline Sheboygan area in 
order to manage regional ozone pollution impacts along the shoreline of 
Lake Michigan. Expanding nonattainment areas and imposing the 
requirements that accompany a nonattainment area designation are not 
the only tools to achieve emission reductions under the CAA; CAA 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also known as the good neighbor provision, 
requires states to eliminate emissions that significantly contribute to 
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in another state. We 
acknowledge that the Shoreline Sheboygan area's ozone concentrations 
are impacted by emissions from upwind states. WDNR's analysis includes 
source apportionment modeling showing that, for anthropogenic emissions 
within modeled source regions, upwind sources in Illinois contribute 
the largest share of emissions. Under the authority of the good 
neighbor provision, EPA has required emission reductions from Illinois 
and other upwind states to address contribution to the Shoreline 
Sheboygan area in regional interstate transport rulemakings such as the 
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and the CSAPR Update. The CSAPR 
Update, which took effect in 2017 (i.e. the beginning of the 3-year 
period during which the Shoreline Sheboygan area began monitoring 
attainment) was estimated to result in a 20% reduction in ozone season 
NOX emissions from electric generating units in the eastern 
United States. In addition, Wisconsin's submittal shows that between 
2011 and 2017, NOX emissions from the multistate Chicago 
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS decreased by 33%, and VOC 
emissions from the Chicago area decreased by 18%. Much of this 
reduction is likely attributable to the fact that the Chicago area is 
itself a nonattainment area, subject to the same or similar control 
requirements as the Shoreline Sheboygan area, which would further limit 
any efficacy of expanding the Shoreline Sheboygan area.
    Second, EPA disagrees that unusual ozone season meteorology is the 
``likely significant contributor'' to the Sheboygan Shoreline area's 
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Similarly, EPA disagrees with the 
commenter's assertion that meteorology in 2019, specifically, 
significantly ``deviated from historical averages for wind direction 
and temperature.'' Meteorology's impact on ozone formation and the 
variability that that can cause in ozone concentrations from year to 
year is expressly accounted for in EPA's form of the NAAQS. Attainment 
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, like the 1997 ozone NAAQS before it, is 
measured by averaging the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 
average concentrations over a 3-year period. In our rulemaking 
promulgating the 1997 ozone NAAQS, EPA noted the ``lack of year-to-year 
stability'' inherent to the prior 1979 ozone NAAQS, and determined that 
a form including a 3-year average would ``provide some insulation from 
the impacts of extreme meteorological events that are conducive to 
ozone formation.'' (62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997). Similarly, when EPA 
revised the NAAQS in 2008, we recognized ``that it is important to have 
a form that is stable and insulated from the impacts of extreme 
meteorological events that are conducive to ozone formation. Such 
instability can have the effect of reducing public health protection, 
because frequent shifting in and out of attainment due of 
meteorological conditions can disrupt an area's ongoing implementation 
plans and associated control programs. Providing more stability is one 
of the reasons that EPA moved to a concentration-based form in 1997.'' 
(73 FR 16435, March 27, 2008). We therefore observe that as a general 
matter, some year-to-year variation in meteorology is expected, and 
that EPA designed the form of the 2008 ozone NAAQS to accommodate that 
variability.
    We do not think that lower temperatures in 2019 was the cause of 
the Shoreline Sheboygan area's attainment. The commenter's own analysis 
shows that the average summer temperature across the years 2008 through 
2018 was 61.9 degrees Fahrenheit, and the 2019 summer temperature was 
60.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Rather than indicating that 2019 was an 
outlier year in terms of temperature, the commenter's data shows that 
2019 was a very typical year in terms of summer temperatures. According 
to the commenter's analysis, the average summer temperature in 2019 was 
only the third lowest out of 11 years. Further, EPA is determining that 
the Shoreline Sheboygan area is attaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on 
data from the 2017-2019 period; as shown in the commenter's analysis, 
2017 and 2018 were among the five warmest out of 11 years. As discussed 
above, EPA designed the form of the 2008 ozone NAAQS to accommodate 
year-to-year variation in meteorology, including variability between 
relatively cooler years and relatively warmer years.
    In terms of wind direction, we acknowledge that southerly winds can 
play a role on high ozone days in the Sheboygan Shoreline area. But it 
is important to keep in mind that high ozone cannot form in the absence 
of precursor emissions. The commenter contends that in 2019, the 
average hourly wind direction at the Kohler Andrae site was 173 
degrees, compared to the average hourly wind direction of 190 degrees 
for six other years including 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2016, and 2017. 
Annual average hourly wind direction is not a meaningful parameter to 
consider when analyzing high ozone episodes, particularly at the Kohler 
Andrae site which is impacted by highly variable wind direction and 
lake breezes, because it does not narrow in on wind

[[Page 41409]]

direction during the specific time periods that are contemporaneous 
with high ozone. Further, wind direction alone is not a meaningful 
parameter to consider in analyzing high ozone since it excludes other 
important factors such as emissions, wind speed, atmospheric boundary 
layer height, temperature inversion, etc. WDNR's February 11, 2020 
submittal (available in the docket for this rulemaking) includes a 
statistical study, known as a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) 
analysis, conducted by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium 
(LADCO) on ozone data from the Shoreline Sheboygan area. LADCO's CART 
analysis groups high ozone day data (i.e., over 50 ppb) based on 
meteorological similarity, and shows that for every group, ozone levels 
at the Kohler Andrae monitor have decreased over the 14-year period 
from 2005-2018. Although highest ozone concentrations typically 
occurred on days which experienced southerly winds and high 
temperatures, those days also experienced the steepest declines in 
ozone concentrations over the 14-year period. LADCO's CART analysis 
shows that when the influence of meteorological variability is largely 
removed, whether it is favorable or unfavorable meteorology, ozone 
concentrations declined regardless, indicating that the downward trend 
in ozone levels is attributable to reductions in precursor emissions. 
Given the results of the LADCO analysis combined with the reasons 
outlined above pertaining to 2019 meteorology as well as the form of 
the NAAQS, EPA disagrees with the commenter's contention that unusual 
meteorology is the primary cause of attaining ozone concentrations at 
the Kohler Andrae monitor. Rather, EPA concludes that attainment is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions in precursor emissions from 
within the Shoreline Sheboygan area and from upwind areas elsewhere in 
Wisconsin and in other states during the relevant time period.
    Lastly, EPA acknowledges the commenter's assertions that ozone 
problems will not be solved through redesignations, that regional 
solutions are required, and that coordinated cooperation between 
stakeholders may lead to improved air quality. The Sheboygan County 
area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS will retain its nonattainment 
designation, and EPA will continue to address ozone problems along Lake 
Michigan through implementation of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA also 
continues to implement programs addressing regional and interstate 
transport of NOX, such as CSAPR. Finally, EPA encourages the 
commenter to remain engaged with stakeholders in the effort to protect 
human health and the environment.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is determining that the Shoreline Sheboygan nonattainment area 
is attaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on quality-assured and 
certified monitoring data for 2017-2019. EPA is approving Wisconsin's 
2011 base year emissions inventory, emission statement certification 
SIP, VOC RACT SIP, I/M certification SIP, and NOX RACT 
certification SIP, and is determining that the area meets the 
requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 
EPA is thus changing the legal designation of the Shoreline Sheboygan 
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA is 
also approving, as a revision to the Wisconsin SIP, the State's 
maintenance plan for the area. The maintenance plan is designed to keep 
the Shoreline Sheboygan area in attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
through 2032. EPA finds adequate and is approving the newly-established 
2025 and 2032 MVEBs for the Shoreline Sheboygan area. Finally, EPA is 
approving the VOC RACT SIP revisions included in Wisconsin's February 
11, 2020 and April 1, 2020 submittals.
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act (APA), EPA finds there is good cause for these actions to become 
effective immediately upon publication. The immediate effective date 
for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and section 
553(d)(3).
    Section 553(d)(1) of the APA provides that final rules shall not 
become effective until 30 days after publication in the Federal 
Register ``except . . . a substantive rule which grants or recognizes 
an exemption or relieves a restriction.'' The purpose of this provision 
is to ``give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their 
behavior before the final rule takes effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed. 
Commc'n Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United 
States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting 
legislative history). However, when the agency grants or recognizes an 
exemption or relieves a restriction, affected parties do not need a 
reasonable time to adjust because the effect is not adverse. EPA has 
determined that this rule relieves a restriction because this rule 
permanently relieves the state of the requirement to submit certain 
planning SIPs, such as an attainment demonstration and associated RACM, 
RFP plans, contingency measures, and other planning elements related to 
attainment.
    Section 553(d)(3) of the APA provides that final rules shall not 
become effective until 30 days after publication in the Federal 
Register ``except . . . as otherwise provided by the agency for good 
cause.'' The purpose of this provision is to ``give affected parties a 
reasonable time to adjust their behavior before the final rule takes 
effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed. Commc'n Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 
(D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 
1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting legislative history). Thus, in 
determining whether good cause exists to waive the 30-day delay, an 
agency should ``balance the necessity for immediate implementation 
against principles of fundamental fairness which require that all 
affected persons be afforded a reasonable amount of time to prepare for 
the effective date of its ruling.'' Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d at 1105. EPA 
has determined that there is good cause for making this final rule 
effective immediately because this rule does not create any new 
regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to 
prepare before the rule takes effect. This rule approves into the SIP 
the VOC RACT SIP revisions included in Wisconsin's February 11, 2020 
and April 1, 2020 submittals, which include Administrative Order AM-20-
02 for Kieffer & Co. Inc. and Administrative Order AM-20-03 for Kohler 
Power Systems. These Administrative Orders were signed on February 4, 
2020 and February 28, 2020, respectively, and have been effective and 
enforceable since the dates of signature. The two affected sources, 
therefore, do not require time to adjust. On balance, EPA finds 
affected parties would benefit from the immediate suspension of the 
requirement to submit certain planning SIPs, instead of delaying by 30 
days the suspension of this requirement.
    For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under both 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(1) and U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for these actions to become effective on 
the date of publication of these actions.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Wisconsin 
Administrative Orders described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set 
forth below. EPA has made, and will continue

[[Page 41410]]

to make, these documents generally available through 
www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the 
person identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section of 
this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is 
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions 
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to 
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     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 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    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).
    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 September 8, 2020. 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

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: July 1, 2020.
Cheryl Newton,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    Title 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 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 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(139) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (139) On April 1, 2020, the Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources submitted requests to incorporate Administrative Order AM-20-
02 for Kieffer & Co. Inc. and Administrative Order AM-20-03 for Kohler 
Power Systems into the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 
orders establish, through permanent and enforceable emission limits and 
other requirements, Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 
equivalency demonstrations for the facilities located in Sheboygan 
County, Wisconsin.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Administrative Order AM-20-02, issued by the Wisconsin 
Department of Natural Resources on February 4, 2020, to the Kieffer & 
Co. Inc. facility located in Sheboygan, Wisconsin.
    (B) Administrative Order AM-20-03, issued by the Wisconsin 
Department of Natural Resources on February 28, 2020, to the Kohler 
Power Systems facility located in Mosel, Sheboygan County, Wisconsin.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.2585 is amended by adding paragraph (mm) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2585  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

[[Page 41411]]

    (mm) Redesignation. Approval--On February 11, 2020, Wisconsin 
submitted a request to redesignate the Shoreline Sheboygan County area 
to attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. As part of the 
redesignation request, the State submitted a maintenance plan as 
required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section 
175 maintenance plan include a contingency plan and an obligation to 
submit a subsequent maintenance plan revision in eight years as 
required by the Clean Air Act. The ozone maintenance plan also 
establishes 2025 and 2032 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 
the area. The 2025 MVEBs for the Inland Sheboygan County area are 0.50 
tons per hot summer day for VOC and 1.00 tons per hot summer day for 
NOX. The 2032 MVEBs for the Inland Sheboygan County area are 
0.36 tons per hot summer day for VOC and 0.77 tons per hot summer day 
for NOX.
* * * * *

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.


0
5. In Sec.  81.350, the table entitled ``Wisconsin--2008 8-Hour Ozone 
NAAQS [Primary and Secondary]'' is amended by revising the entry for 
``Shoreline Sheboygan County, WI'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.350  Wisconsin.

* * * * *

                                       Wisconsin--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Designation                       Classification
             Designated area              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Date \1\           Type             Date \1\            Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Shoreline Sheboygan County, WI \2\ \5\...       7/10/2020  Attainment......
    Sheboygan County (part):
        Inclusive and east of the
         following roadways going from
         the northern county boundary to
         the southern county boundary:
         Highway 43, Wilson Lima Road,
         Minderhaud Road, County Road KK/
         Town Line Road, N 10th Street,
         County Road A S/Center Avenue,
         Gibbons Road, Hoftiezer Road,
         Highway 32, Palmer Road/Smies
         Road/Palmer Road, Amsterdam Road/
         County Road RR, Termaat Road.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\5\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2019 for both Inland Sheboygan County, WI, and Shoreline Sheboygan
  County, WI, nonattainment areas.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-14691 Filed 7-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


