Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 54725 

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 November 10, 2015. 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 

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 section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Emissions Reporting, 

Incorporation by reference, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

dioxide. 

Dated: August 28, 2015. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.770, the table in 

paragraph (c) is amended by revising the 

entry for Rule 7–4.1–21 ‘‘Walsh and 

Kelly sulfur dioxide emission 

limitations’’ under the subheading 

entitled ‘‘Rule 4.1 Lake County Sulfur 

Dioxide Emission Limitations’’ under 

the heading entitled ‘‘Article 7. Sulfur 

Dioxide Rules’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS

Indiana 

citation Subject Indiana effective date EPA Approval date Notes 

*******

Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules 

*******

Rule 4.1 Lake County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations 

*******

7–4.1–21 ........................... Walsh and Kelly sulfur dioxide emission limitations .. 5/29/2015 9/11/2015, [insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–22716 Filed 9–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704; FRL–9933–62– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; 

Infrastructure SIP Requirements for 

the 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 

SO2 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve some elements of state 

implementation plan (SIP) submissions 

from Wisconsin regarding the 

infrastructure requirements of section 

110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 

2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The infrastructure 

requirements are designed to ensure that 

the structural components of each 

state’s air quality management program 

are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA. The 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
54726 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

proposed rulemaking associated with 

this final action was published on April 

20, 2015, and EPA received no 

comments during the comment period, 

which ended on May 20, 2015. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 13, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., 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 electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 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. 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. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background of these SIP 

submissions? 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. What is the background of these SIP 

submissions? 

A. What state submissions does this 

rulemaking address? 

This rulemaking addresses June 20, 

2013, submissions and a January 28, 

2015, clarification from the Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR) intended to address all 

applicable infrastructure requirements 

for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 

SO2 NAAQS. 

B. Why did the state make these SIP 

submissions? 

Under section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit 

infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their 

SIPs provide for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

NAAQS, including the 2008 ozone, 

2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. These 

submissions must contain any revisions 

needed for meeting the applicable SIP 

requirements of section 110(a)(2), or 

certifications that their existing SIPs for 

the NAAQS already meet those 

requirements. 

EPA has highlighted this statutory 

requirement in multiple guidance 

documents. The most recent, entitled 

‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements 

under CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’, 

was published on September 13, 2013. 

C. What is the scope of this rulemaking? 

EPA is acting upon the SIP 

submissions from Wisconsin that 

address the infrastructure requirements 

of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 

2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2

NAAQS. The requirement for states to 

make SIP submissions of this type arises 

out of CAA section 110(a)(1), which 

states that states must make SIP 

submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such 

shorter period as the Administrator may 

prescribe) after the promulgation of a 

national primary ambient air quality 

standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and 

these SIP submissions are to provide for 

the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The 

statute directly imposes on states the 

duty to make these SIP submissions, 

and the requirement to make the 

submissions is not conditioned upon 

EPA’s taking any action other than 

promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of 

specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such 

plan’’ submission must address. 

EPA has historically referred to these 

SIP submissions made for the purpose 

of satisfying the requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(1) and (2) as 

‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. 

Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 

does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses 

the term to distinguish this particular 

type of SIP submission from 

submissions that are intended to satisfy 

other SIP requirements under the CAA, 

such as SIP submissions that address 

the nonattainment planning 

requirements of part D and the 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) requirements of part C of title I of 

the CAA, and ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ 

submissions required to address the 

visibility protection requirements of 

CAA section 169A. 

This rulemaking will not cover three 

substantive areas because they are not 

integral to acting on a state’s 

infrastructure SIP submissions: (i) 

Existing provisions related to excess 

emissions during periods of start-up, 

shutdown, or malfunction (’’SSM’’) at 

sources, that may be contrary to the 

CAA and EPA’s policies addressing 

such excess emissions; (ii) existing 

provisions related to ‘‘director’s 

variance’’ or ‘‘director’s discretion’’ that 

purport to permit revisions to SIP 

approved emissions limits with limited 

public notice or without requiring 

further approval by EPA, that may be 

contrary to the CAA; and, (iii) existing 

provisions for PSD programs that may 

be inconsistent with current 

requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final NSR 

Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 

(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 

FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (‘‘NSR 

Reform’’). Instead, EPA has the 

authority to address each one of these 

substantive areas in separate 

rulemakings. A detailed history, 

interpretation, and rationale as they 

relate to infrastructure SIP requirements 

can be found in EPA’s May 13, 2014, 

proposed rule entitled, ‘‘Infrastructure 

SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS’’ in the section, ‘‘What is the 

scope of this rulemaking?’’ (see 79 FR 

27241 at 27242–27245). 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

most elements of submissions from 

Wisconsin certifying that its current SIP 

is sufficient to meet the required 

infrastructure elements under section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 ozone, 

2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

The proposed rulemaking associated 

with this final action was published on 

April 20, 2015 (75 FR 21685), and EPA 

received no comments during the 

comment period, which ended on May 

20, 2015. EPA is therefore taking final 

action to approve, as proposed, most 

elements of Wisconsin’s submissions. 

EPA’s actions for the state’s 

satisfaction of infrastructure SIP 

requirements, by element of section 

110(a)(2) and NAAQS, are contained in 

the table below. 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 54727 

Element 2008 

Ozone 

2010 

NO2

2010 

SO2

(A)—Emission limits and other control measures ............................................................................................... A A A 

(B)—Ambient air quality monitoring/data system ................................................................................................ A A A 

(C)1—Program for enforcement of control measures ......................................................................................... A A A 

(C)2—PSD ........................................................................................................................................................... NA NA NA 

(D)1—I Prong 1: Interstate transport—significant contribution ........................................................................... NA A NA 

(D)2—I Prong 2: Interstate transport—interfere with maintenance ..................................................................... NA A NA 

(D)3—II Prong 3: Interstate transport—prevention of significant deterioration ................................................... NA NA NA 

(D)4—II Prong 4: Interstate transport—protect visibility ...................................................................................... A A A 

(D)5—Interstate and international pollution abatement ....................................................................................... A A A 

(E)1—Adequate resources .................................................................................................................................. A A A 

(E)2—State board requirements .......................................................................................................................... NA NA NA 

(F)—Stationary source monitoring system .......................................................................................................... A A A 

(G)—Emergency power ....................................................................................................................................... A A A 

(H)—Future SIP revisions .................................................................................................................................... A A A 

(I)—Nonattainment planning requirements of part D .......................................................................................... NA NA NA 

(J)1—Consultation with government officials ...................................................................................................... A A A 

(J)2—Public notification ....................................................................................................................................... A A A 

(J)3—PSD ............................................................................................................................................................ NA NA NA 

(J)4—Visibility protection ..................................................................................................................................... A A A 

(K)—Air quality modeling/data ............................................................................................................................. A A A 

(L)—Permitting fees ............................................................................................................................................. A A A 

(M)—Consultation and participation by affected local entities ............................................................................ A A A 

In the above table, the key is as follows: 

A .................... Approve. 

NA .................. No Action/Separate Rulemaking. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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); 

• 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 November 10, 2015. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides. 

Dated: August 27, 2015. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
54728 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 176 / Friday, September 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.2591 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.2591 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(g) Approval—In a June 20, 2013, 

submission with a January 28, 2015, 

clarification, Wisconsin certified that 

the state has satisfied the infrastructure 

SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 

through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. We are not taking 

action on the prevention of significant 

deterioration requirements related to 

section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J), 

the transport provisions in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the state board 

requirements of (E)(ii). We will address 

these requirements in a separate action. 

(h) Approval—In a June 20, 2013, 

submission with a January 28, 2015, 

clarification, Wisconsin certified that 

the state has satisfied the infrastructure 

SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 

through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 

2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS. 

We are not taking action on the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

requirements related to section 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J), and the 

state board requirements of (E)(ii). We 

will address these requirements in a 

separate action. 

(i) Approval—In a June 20, 2013, 

submission with a January 28, 2015, 

clarification, Wisconsin certified that 

the state has satisfied the infrastructure 

SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 

through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 

2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. We 

are not taking action on the prevention 

of significant deterioration requirements 

related to section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), 

and (J), the transport provisions in 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the state 

board requirements of (E)(ii). We will 

address these requirements in a separate 

action. 

[FR Doc. 2015–22864 Filed 9–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817; FRL–9933–76– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AQ93 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for the 

Portland Cement Manufacturing 

Industry and Standards of 

Performance for Portland Cement 

Plants; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; correcting 

amendments. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) published a final rule in 

the Federal Register on July 27, 2015, 

titled National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for the 

Portland Cement Manufacturing 

Industry and Standards of Performance 

for Portland Cement Plants. This final 

rule makes technical corrections and 

clarifications to the regulations 

published in that final rule. The rule 

also includes a provision describing 

performance testing requirements when 

a source demonstrates compliance with 

the hydrochloric acid (HCl) emissions 

standard using a continuous emissions 

monitoring system (CEMS) for sulfur 

dioxide measurement and reporting. 

DATES: Effective September 9, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Sharon Nizich, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division (D243–04), Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, telephone number: (919) 541– 

2825; facsimile number: (919) 541–5450; 

email address: nizich.sharon@epa.gov. 

For information about the applicability 

of the national emission standards for 

hazardous air pollutants or new source 

performance standards, contact Mr. 

Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance 

and Media Programs Division (2227A), 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number (202) 564–2970; 

email address yellin.patrick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Summary of Technical Corrections 

The EPA received communications 

from representatives of the Portland 

cement industry on five occasions in 

August 2015 (see memo to the docket 

(EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817) titled, 

‘‘Communications on Errors PCA 

August 2015’’). These communications 

outlined several errors in the regulatory 

text of the final rule (80 FR 44772). 

These all pertain to monitoring 

requirements. The EPA agrees that these 

are errors (typographical and 

unintended phrasing or omissions), and 

is correcting these errors in this 

document. We are also removing two 

passages (which consisted of four 

sentences) that were inadvertently left 

in the final amendments, but were 

discussed by the EPA as being removed 

in the Response to Comment (RTC) 

document for the final amendments (see 

docket item EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817– 

0870, page 8). In the RTC, we discussed 

that data substitution is not an allowed 

practice when determining compliance, 

but these four sentences discuss 

procedures for data substitution. 

Leaving these sentences in the rule, 

thus, does not reflect the EPA’s stated 

intention, and would lead to confusion 

given the direct conflict between the 

RTC document and the rule text. 

We are making one further technical 

correction involving timing of 

performance tests. The correction keeps 

in place the specified time by which 

performance tests must be conducted, 

but will no longer set out a window of 

time in which the test must be 

conducted. The net effect is that 

performance tests can be conducted 

earlier than the window of time in the 

current rule text if a source desires to 

conduct its performance test earlier. The 

EPA had already indicated in the RTC 

document that it was making this 

change (see docket item EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0817–0870, page 5). The EPA 

regards this amendment as a 

clarification (the current rule could be 

interpreted to allow earlier testing) so 

that the rule reads precisely as intended, 

as stated by the EPA in the RTC 

document. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION 

STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR 

POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE 

CATEGORIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES