81 FR 57463 - Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Reasonable Further Progress Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 163 (August 23, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 163 (August 23, 2016)
| Page Range | 57463-57466 | |
| FR Document | 2016-20002 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 57463-57466] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-20002] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0075; FRL-9950-86-Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Reasonable Further Progress Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving an Early Progress Plan and motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX ) for the Kenosha County, Wisconsin 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. Wisconsin submitted an Early Progress Plan for Kenosha County on January 16, 2015. This submittal was developed to establish MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This approval of the Early Progress Plan for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is based on EPA's determination that Wisconsin has demonstrated that the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing these MVEBs, when considered with the emissions from all sources, shows progress toward attainment from the 2011 base year through a 2015 target year. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 22, 2016. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05- OAR-2015-0075 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the [[Page 57464]] 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: Michael Leslie, Environmental Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6680, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is arranged as follows: I. What is the background for this action? II. What are the criteria for early progress plans? III. What is EPA's analysis of the request? IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area? V. What action is EPA taking? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background for this action? EPA's final rule designating nonattainment areas and associated classifications for the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) was published in the Federal Register on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088). A portion of Kenosha County was designated as marginal nonattainment. The Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area had been previously designated nonattainment as part of the larger Milwaukee area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and had MVEBs for NOX and VOC established in the Wisconsin 1997 8-hour maintenance plan SIP. Consequently, the transportation partners in the Kenosha area have to use the 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment MVEBs for the Milwaukee area to demonstrate transportation conformity for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard until new MVEBs are approved or found adequate, as required by the transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.109(c)(2)(i). Wisconsin submitted this plan to establish new MVEBs for Kenosha County developed with EPA's MOVES2014 model. II. What are the criteria for early progress plans? EPA allows for the establishment of MVEBs for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard prior to a state submitting its first required 2008 8-hour ozone SIP that would include new MVEBs. Although voluntary, these ``early'' MVEBs must be established through a plan that meets all the requirements of a SIP submittal. This plan is known as the ``Early Progress Plan.'' Specifically and in reference to Early Progress Plans, the preamble of the July 1, 2004, final transportation conformity rule (see, 69 FR 40019) reads as follows: The first 8-hour ozone SIP could be a control strategy SIP required by the Clean Air Act (e.g., rate-of-progress SIP or attainment demonstration) or a maintenance plan. However, 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas `are free to establish, through the SIP process, a motor vehicle emissions budget or budgets that addresses the new NAAQS in advance of a complete SIP attainment demonstration. That is, a state could submit a motor vehicle emission budget that does not demonstrate attainment but is consistent with projections and commitments to control measures and achieves some progress toward attainment' (August 15, 1997, 62 FR 43799). A SIP submitted earlier than otherwise required can demonstrate a significant level of emissions reductions from current level of emissions, instead of a specific percentage required by the Clean Air Act for moderate and above ozone areas. The Early Progress Plan must demonstrate that the SIP revision containing the MVEBs, when considered with emissions from all sources, and when projected from the base year to a future year, shows progress toward attainment. EPA has previously indicated that a 5 percent to 10 percent reduction in emissions from all sources could represent a significant level of emissions reductions from current levels (69 FR 40019). This allowance is provided so that areas have an opportunity to use the budget test to demonstrate conformity as opposed to the interim conformity tests (i.e., 2002 baseline test and/or action versus baseline test). The budget test with an adequate or approved SIP budget is generally more protective of air quality and provides a more relevant basis for conformity determinations than the interim emissions test. (69 FR 40026). It should also be noted that the Early Progress Plan is not a required plan and does not substitute for required submissions such as an attainment demonstration or rate-of-progress plan, if such plans become required for the Kenosha 8-hour ozone area. III. What is EPA's analysis of the request? On January 16, 2015, the State submitted to EPA an Early Progress Plan for the sole purpose of establishing MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8- hour ozone nonattainment area. The submittal utilizes a base year of 2011, and a projected year 2015 to establish NOX and VOC MVEBs. The planning assumptions used to develop the MVEBs were discussed and agreed to by the Kenosha interagency consultation group, which consists of the transportation and air quality partners in the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. Tables 1 and 2 below show the differences by source categories between the 2011 base year and 2015 forecast year. The NOX and VOC emissions in tons per day (tpd) within the Kenosha nonattainment area are expected to decrease significantly, 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively, between 2011 and 2015. These emission trends demonstrate that progress will be made towards attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Table 1--Kenosha County 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area NOX Emissions [Kenosha County NOX Emissions] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2011 NOX 2015 NOX Source (tpd) (tpd) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Point............................................. 8.80 6.15 Area.............................................. 1.09 1.33 On-road Mobile.................................... 5.17 4.40 Non-Road Mobile................................... 2.14 1.69 --------------------- Total......................................... 17.17 15.98 --------------------- Total Percent Reduction........................... 6.9% ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 2--Kenosha County 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area VOC Emissions [Kenosha County VOC Emissions] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2011 VOC 2015 VOC VOC Source (tpd) (tpd) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Point............................................. 0.70 2.63 Area.............................................. 4.78 4.72 On-road Mobile.................................... 2.38 1.99 Non-Road Mobile................................... 1.46 1.08 --------------------- Total......................................... 9.32 8.49 --------------------- Total Percent Reduction........................... 8.9% ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EPA found these MVEBs adequate for transportation conformity purposes in [[Page 57465]] an earlier action (80 FR 17428, April 1, 2015). As of April 16, 2015, the effective date of EPA's adequacy finding for these MVEBs, conformity determinations in Kenosha County must meet the budget test using these 2008 8-hour ozone MVEBs, instead of the 1997 8-hour ozone MVEBs. Please note that this adequacy finding does not relate to the merits of the SIP submittal, nor does it indicate whether the submittal meets the requirements for approval. This EPA rulemaking action takes formal action on the Early Progress Plan SIP revision. IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area? Through this rulemaking, EPA is approving the 2015 regional MVEBs for NOX and VOC for the Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA has determined that the MVEBs contained in the Early Progress Plan SIP revision are consistent with emission reductions from all sources within the nonattainment area and are showing progress toward attainment. The 2015 MVEBs in tpd for VOCs and NOX for the Kenosha County, Wisconsin nonattainment area are as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2015 NOX 2015 VOCs Area (tpd) (tpd) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kenosha County.................................. 4.397 1.944 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ V. What action is EPA taking? EPA is approving Kenosha's Early Progress Plan, including the 2015 MVEBs for NOX and VOC. The Early Progress Plan demonstrates progress towards attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Kenosha nonattainment area. The NOX and VOC emissions reductions from 2011 to 2015 for Kenosha County nonattainment areas were 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent, respectively. These emission reductions are based on control measures that are permanent and enforceable and will continue to improve air quality in the region, thus demonstrating that the MVEBs are showing progress toward attainment. EPA issues this direct final rulemaking in response to Wisconsin's January 16, 2015 submittal of an Early Progress Plan. This revision is a voluntary SIP revision for the sole purpose of establishing MVEBs for the purpose of implementing transportation conformity in the Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the State plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 24, 2016 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by September 22, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective October 24, 2016. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act. 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); 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 Clean Air Act; 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 24, 2016. 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. Parties with [[Page 57466]] objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds, Oxides of nitrogen. Dated: August 5, 2016. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting 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 (ee) to read as follows: Sec. 52.2585 Control strategy; ozone. * * * * * (ee) Approval--On January 16, 2015, the State of Wisconsin submitted a revision to its State Implementation Plan for Kenosha County, Wisconsin. The submittal established new Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO X ) for the year 2015. The MVEBs for Kenosha County nonattainment area are now: 1.994 tons per day of VOC emissions and 4.397 tons per day of NOX emissions for the year 2015. [FR Doc. 2016-20002 Filed 8-22-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 57463
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act health or safety standard. This good ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
(UMRA) cause final action simply extends the AGENCY
This action does not contain any date for the EPA to take action on a
unfunded mandate of $100 million or petition and does not have any impact 40 CFR Part 52
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. on human health or the environment. [EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0075; FRL–9950–86–
1531–1538, and does not significantly or Region 5]
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
uniquely affect small governments. The
action imposes no enforceable duty on Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;
This action is subject to the CRA, and
any state, local or tribal governments or Kenosha County 2008 8-Hour Ozone
the EPA will submit a rule report to
the private sector. Nonattainment Area Reasonable
each House of the Congress and to the Further Progress Plan
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Comptroller General of the United
States. The CRA allows the issuing AGENCY: Environmental Protection
This action does not have federalism Agency (EPA).
agency to make a rule effective sooner
implications. It will not have substantial ACTION: Direct final rule.
direct effects on the states, on the than otherwise provided by the CRA if
relationship between the national the agency makes a good cause finding
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
government and the states, or on the that notice-and-comment rulemaking Agency (EPA) is approving an Early
distribution of power and procedures are impracticable, Progress Plan and motor vehicle
responsibilities among the various unnecessary or contrary to the public emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile
levels of government. interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides
made a good cause finding for this rule of nitrogen (NOX) for the Kenosha
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation as discussed in Section II.B of this County, Wisconsin 8-hour ozone
and Coordination With Indian Tribal document, including the basis for that nonattainment area. Wisconsin
Governments finding. submitted an Early Progress Plan for
This action does not have tribal Kenosha County on January 16, 2015.
implications, as specified in Executive IV. Statutory Authority
This submittal was developed to
Order 13175. This good cause final The statutory authority for this action establish MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008
action simply extends the date for the 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This
is provided by sections 110, 126 and
EPA to take action on a petition. Thus, approval of the Early Progress Plan for
307 of the CAA as amended (42 U.S.C.
Executive Order 13175 does not apply the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone
7410, 7426 and 7607).
to this rule. nonattainment area is based on EPA’s
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of V. Judicial Review determination that Wisconsin has
Children From Environmental Health demonstrated that the State
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
and Safety Risks judicial review of this final rule is containing these MVEBs, when
The EPA interprets Executive Order available only by the filing of a petition considered with the emissions from all
13045 as applying only to those for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals sources, shows progress toward
regulatory actions that concern for the appropriate circuit by October attainment from the 2011 base year
environmental health or safety risks that 24, 2016. Under section 307(b)(2) of the through a 2015 target year.
the EPA has reason to believe may CAA, the requirements that are the DATES: This direct final rule will be
disproportionately affect children, per subject of this final rule may not be effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory challenged later in civil or criminal receives adverse comments by
action’’ in section 2–202 of the proceedings brought by us to enforce September 22, 2016. If adverse
Executive Order. This action is not these requirements. comments are received, EPA will
subject to Executive Order 13045 publish a timely withdrawal of the
because it does not concern an List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 direct final rule in the Federal Register
environmental health risk or safety risk. informing the public that the rule will
Environmental protection,
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Administrative practices and not take effect.
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, procedures, Air pollution control, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Distribution or Use Electric utilities, Incorporation by identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
This action is not subject to Executive reference, Intergovernmental relations, OAR–2015–0075 at http://
Order 13211, because it is not a www.regulations.gov or via email to
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone.
significant regulatory action under persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. For
Dated: August 15, 2016. comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
Executive Order 12866.
Gina McCarthy, follow the online instructions for
I. National Technology Transfer and Administrator. submitting comments. Once submitted,
Advancement Act (NTTAA) comments cannot be edited or removed
[FR Doc. 2016–20140 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am]
This rulemaking does not involve from Regulations.gov. For either manner
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
technical standards. of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Do not submit electronically any
Actions To Address Environmental information you consider to be
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Justice in Minority Populations and Confidential Business Information (CBI)
Low-Income Populations or other information whose disclosure is
The EPA believes that this action is restricted by statute. Multimedia
not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it accompanied by a written comment.
does not establish an environmental The written comment is considered the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57626/page/1.svg)
![57464 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
official comment and should include Kenosha County developed with EPA’s III. What is EPA’s analysis of the
discussion of all points you wish to MOVES2014 model. request?
make. EPA will generally not consider On January 16, 2015, the State
II. What are the criteria for early
comments or comment contents located submitted to EPA an Early Progress Plan
progress plans?
outside of the primary submission (i.e. for the sole purpose of establishing
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing EPA allows for the establishment of
MVEBs for the Kenosha 2008 8-hour
system). For additional submission MVEBs for the 2008 8-hour ozone
ozone nonattainment area. The
methods, please contact the person standard prior to a state submitting its
submittal utilizes a base year of 2011,
identified in the FOR FURTHER first required 2008 8-hour ozone SIP
and a projected year 2015 to establish
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the that would include new MVEBs.
NOX and VOC MVEBs. The planning
full EPA public comment policy, Although voluntary, these ‘‘early’’
assumptions used to develop the
information about CBI or multimedia MVEBs must be established through a
MVEBs were discussed and agreed to by
submissions, and general guidance on plan that meets all the requirements of
the Kenosha interagency consultation
making effective comments, please visit a SIP submittal. This plan is known as
group, which consists of the
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ the ‘‘Early Progress Plan.’’ Specifically
transportation and air quality partners
commenting-epa-dockets. and in reference to Early Progress Plans,
in the Kenosha 2008 8-hour ozone
the preamble of the July 1, 2004, final
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: nonattainment area. Tables 1 and 2
transportation conformity rule (see, 69
Michael Leslie, Environmental below show the differences by source
FR 40019) reads as follows:
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air categories between the 2011 base year
Programs Branch (AR–18J), The first 8-hour ozone SIP could be a and 2015 forecast year. The NOX and
Environmental Protection Agency, control strategy SIP required by the Clean Air VOC emissions in tons per day (tpd)
Act (e.g., rate-of-progress SIP or attainment
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, demonstration) or a maintenance plan.
within the Kenosha nonattainment area
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, However, 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are expected to decrease significantly,
leslie.michael@epa.gov. ‘are free to establish, through the SIP process, 6.9 percent and 8.9 percent,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: a motor vehicle emissions budget or budgets respectively, between 2011 and 2015.
Throughout this document whenever that addresses the new NAAQS in advance These emission trends demonstrate that
of a complete SIP attainment demonstration. progress will be made towards
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean That is, a state could submit a motor vehicle
EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
emission budget that does not demonstrate NAAQS.
section is arranged as follows: attainment but is consistent with projections
I. What is the background for this action? and commitments to control measures and
achieves some progress toward attainment’ TABLE 1—KENOSHA COUNTY 2008
II. What are the criteria for early progress
plans? (August 15, 1997, 62 FR 43799). A SIP OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA NOX
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the request? submitted earlier than otherwise required can EMISSIONS
IV. What are the MVEBs for the Kenosha demonstrate a significant level of emissions [Kenosha County NOX Emissions]
County 2008 8-hour ozone reductions from current level of emissions,
nonattainment area? instead of a specific percentage required by
2011 2015
V. What action is EPA taking? the Clean Air Act for moderate and above Source NOX NOX
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews ozone areas. (tpd) (tpd)
I. What is the background for this The Early Progress Plan must
demonstrate that the SIP revision Point .......................... 8.80 6.15
action? Area .......................... 1.09 1.33
containing the MVEBs, when On-road Mobile ......... 5.17 4.40
EPA’s final rule designating considered with emissions from all Non-Road Mobile ...... 2.14 1.69
nonattainment areas and associated sources, and when projected from the
classifications for the 2008 ozone base year to a future year, shows Total ................... 17.17 15.98
National Ambient Air Quality Standards progress toward attainment. EPA has
(NAAQS) was published in the Federal previously indicated that a 5 percent to Total Percent Reduc-
Register on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088). 10 percent reduction in emissions from tion ........................ 6.9%
A portion of Kenosha County was all sources could represent a significant
designated as marginal nonattainment. level of emissions reductions from TABLE 2—KENOSHA COUNTY 2008
The Kenosha County 2008 8-hour ozone current levels (69 FR 40019). This OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA VOC
nonattainment area had been previously allowance is provided so that areas have
designated nonattainment as part of the
EMISSIONS
an opportunity to use the budget test to
larger Milwaukee area for the 1997 8- demonstrate conformity as opposed to [Kenosha County VOC Emissions]
hour ozone standard and had MVEBs for the interim conformity tests (i.e., 2002
NOX and VOC established in the 2011 2015
baseline test and/or action versus VOC Source VOC VOC
Wisconsin 1997 8-hour maintenance baseline test). The budget test with an (tpd) (tpd)
plan SIP. Consequently, the adequate or approved SIP budget is
transportation partners in the Kenosha generally more protective of air quality Point .......................... 0.70 2.63
area have to use the 1997 8-hour ozone and provides a more relevant basis for Area .......................... 4.78 4.72
nonattainment MVEBs for the conformity determinations than the On-road Mobile ......... 2.38 1.99
Milwaukee area to demonstrate Non-Road Mobile ...... 1.46 1.08
interim emissions test. (69 FR 40026).
transportation conformity for the 2008 It should also be noted that the Early
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Total ................... 9.32 8.49
8-hour ozone standard until new Progress Plan is not a required plan and
MVEBs are approved or found adequate, does not substitute for required Total Percent Reduc-
as required by the transportation submissions such as an attainment tion ........................ 8.9%
conformity rule at 40 CFR demonstration or rate-of-progress plan,
93.109(c)(2)(i). Wisconsin submitted if such plans become required for the EPA found these MVEBs adequate for
this plan to establish new MVEBs for Kenosha 8-hour ozone area. transportation conformity purposes in
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57626/page/2.svg)
![57466 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
objections to this direct final rule are ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION submissions, and general guidance on
encouraged to file a comment in AGENCY making effective comments, please visit
response to the parallel notice of http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
proposed rulemaking for this action 40 CFR Part 52 commenting-epa-dockets.
published in the proposed rules section [EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0418; FRL–9950–94– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
of today’s Federal Register, rather than Region 3] David Talley, (215) 814–2117, or by
file an immediate petition for judicial email at talley.david@epa.gov.
review of this direct final rule, so that Approval and Promulgation of Air SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Minor New Source Review—Nonroad I. Background
and address the comment in the
Engines On June 17, 2014, the Virginia
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to AGENCY: Environmental Protection Department of Environmental Quality
enforce its requirements. (See CAA Agency (EPA). (VADEQ), on behalf of the
section 307(b)(2).) ACTION: Direct final rule. Commonwealth of Virginia, submitted a
formal revision to its SIP. The SIP
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection revision consists of amendments to the
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final definition of ‘‘nonroad engine’’ under
Environmental protection, Air action to approve revisions to the VADEQ’s minor NSR regulations.
pollution control, Incorporation by Commonwealth of Virginia state Virginia has a SIP approved minor NSR
reference, Intergovernmental relations, implementation plan (SIP). The program located in the Virginia
Ozone, Volatile organic compounds, revisions amend the definition of Administrative Code (VAC) at 9VAC 5–
Oxides of nitrogen. ‘‘nonroad engine’’ under Virginia’s 80 which regulates certain
Dated: August 5, 2016. minor New Source Review (NSR) modifications and construction of
Robert A. Kaplan,
requirements to align with Federal stationary sources within areas covered
requirements. EPA is approving these by its SIP as necessary to assure the
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. revisions to the Virginia SIP in national ambient air quality standards
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: accordance with the requirements of the (NAAQS) are achieved.
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on October
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
PART 52—APPROVAL AND Analysis
PROMULGATION OF 24, 2016 without further notice, unless
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS EPA receives adverse written comment VADEQ’s June 17, 2014 SIP submittal
by September 22, 2016. If EPA receives includes revisions to the definition of
such comments, it will publish a timely ‘‘nonroad engine’’ under the VAC,
■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the specifically 9VAC5–80–1110. The
continues to read as follows:
Federal Register and inform the public definition of ‘‘nonroad engine’’ was
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. that the rule will not take effect. expanded to include portable and
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, temporary engines. The revision to
■ 2. Section 52.2585 is amended by 9VAC5–80–1110 makes VADEQ’s
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
adding paragraph (ee) to read as follows: OAR–2016–0418 at http:// definition more consistent with the
§ 52.2585 Control strategy; ozone. www.regulations.gov, or via email to Federal definition at 40 CFR 89.2.
campbell.dave@epa.gov. For comments According to VADEQ, Federal design
* * * * * submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the standards for internal combustion
(ee) Approval—On January 16, 2015, online instructions for submitting engines and Federal fuel standards for
the State of Wisconsin submitted a comments. Once submitted, comments engines are already more restrictive than
revision to its State Implementation cannot be edited or removed from permit requirements for portable and
Plan for Kenosha County, Wisconsin. Regulations.gov. For either manner of temporary engines in Virginia’s minor
The submittal established new Motor submission, EPA may publish any NSR program. Virginia’s amended
Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for comment received to its public docket. definition adopts the Federal definition
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Do not submit electronically any of ‘‘nonroad engine,’’ grouping portable
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) for the year information you consider to be engines and temporary engines together
2015. The MVEBs for Kenosha County confidential business information (CBI) with other non-mobile engines. The
nonattainment area are now: 1.994 tons or other information whose disclosure is revised definition will streamline
per day of VOC emissions and 4.397 restricted by statute. Multimedia Virginia’s minor NSR program by no
tons per day of NOX emissions for the submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be longer requiring VADEQ to issue minor
year 2015. accompanied by a written comment. NSR permits without meaningful
The written comment is considered the additional emissions control
[FR Doc. 2016–20002 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am]
official comment and should include requirements on those engines. Virginia
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P discussion of all points you wish to asserted the amended definition does
make. EPA will generally not consider not increase emissions or otherwise
comments or comment contents located affect air quality.
outside of the primary submission (i.e. EPA finds these revisions are
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing appropriate and meet the Federal
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
system). For additional submission requirements of 40 CFR 51.160 and
methods, please contact the person 51.161, and CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) for
identified in the FOR FURTHER a minor NSR program. Additionally, the
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the revision to 9VAC5–80–1110(and in
full EPA public comment policy, particular the deletions in the revised
information about CBI or multimedia regulation) are in accordance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57626/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-09 11:40:17
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 11:40:17
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule. | |
| Dates | This direct final rule will be effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 22, 2016. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. | |
| Contact | Michael Leslie, Environmental Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6680, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 57463 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Ozone; Volatile Organic Compounds and Oxides of Nitrogen |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR