### State ofWisconsin DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 101 S. Webster Street Box 7921 Madison WI 53707-7921 ScottWalker, Governor Cathy Stepp, Secretary

Telephone 608-266-2621 Toll Free 1-888-936-7463 TTY Access via relay- 711 DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES August 8, 2016 Mr. RobettKaplan Acting Regional Administrator USEPA-RegionV (R-19J) 77 WestJackson Boulevard Chicago IL 60604-3507
Subject: Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision- PM2.5 Increment and Various PSD Program Changes DearMr. Kaplan: Theinformation contained inthis SIP Revisionrequest serves to address several issues for which Wisconsin's 1997 and 2006 PM25Infrastructure SIPs, 1997 ozone Infrastructure SIP, and Wisconsin's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program were partially disapproved. This request replacestherequest submitted on February 8, 2016 requesting parallel processing becausetherule associated with this SIP revision request is now final. Changes 

### inthis rule package address the following disapprovals and findings offailure: 

### I. June 15, 2012 Federal Register (77 FR 35870) Final disapproved ofnarrowportions ofWisconsin's SIP related to identification ofNOx as a precursorto ozone underthe PSD permit program. This notice also covered narrow disapproval of 1997 8-hour ozoneNAAQS and 1997 24-hour PM25 NAAQS infrastructure SIPs for identification ofNOx as a precursorto ozone (EPADocketID EPA-R05-0AR-2007-1179) 2. August II, 2014 Federal Register (79 FR46704) Final Finding ofFailure to Submit a PSD State Implementation Plan Revision for PM25(EPA Docket ID EPA-R05-0AR-2014-0517) 3. December 10 2015 Federal Register (80 FR76637) Final Disapproval ofInfrastructure SIP WithRespect to Oxides ofNitrogen as a Precursorto Ozone Provisions for the 2006 PM25NAAQS (EPA Docket ID EPAR05-0AR-2009-0805) This submittal also serves to supplement infrastructure SIPs previously submitted for which the PSD portions have notyetbeen acted on, includingthe 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010Nitrogen Dioxide, 2010 SulfurDioxide, and 2012 PM25 NAAQS. This supplement is necessaryto showthatWisconsin's PSDpermittingprogram incorporates all federal requirements includingtherequirementto properly regulateNOx as a precursor to ozone. TheWDNRin DNR Board Order AM-15-14 has completed rulemakingto address these deficiencies including identifyingNOx as a precursorto ozone, adding PM25 increment values, modifying select definitions inch.NR 405, and changingthe PM25significantmonitoring concentration. The sections ofAM-15-14that address the deficiencies noted above include:

dnr.wi.gov wisconsin.gov 

### . · • .:Soard Onler**Se~tion.** 

### . ···.· ·.. · .•...·· ..•·· ..·. ·.. .· ... :Oefici<incy Section 3, amendingNR404.05(2) (intra), PM25increment Section 4, creatingNR404.05(2)(am) PM25increment Section 5, amendingNR404.05(3)(intro), PM2.5increment Section 6, creatingNR404.05(3)(am) PM2.5 increment 

## Naturally

## WISCONSIN .. 

# ..

PR/111£0 ONRE"CYCI.£0 PAPER

### Page 2

' Board Order Section ' Deficiency < ,' ',, 

### Section 7, amendingNR404.05(4) (intro), PM25increment Section 8, creatingNR404.05(4)(am), PM25 increment Section 9, amendingNR405.02(3),(21)(a), 

### Changes to "Baseline area", "major modification", and "Major source baseline and (21m)(a) date" definitions Section 10, creatingNR405.02(21m)(c) Changes to "Major source baseline date" defmition Section 11, amendingNR405.02(22)(b) Changes to address NOx as a precursorto ozone and changes to "Minor sourcebaseline and (22m)(a)!. and (b)l., date" 

### Section 12, creatingNR405.02(22m)(a)3 Changes to "Minor source baseline date" Section 13, creatingNR405.02(27)(a)6., Changes to address NOx as a precursorto ozone 

### Section 14, amendingNR405.07(8)(a)3m., PM2 

### .s SignificantMonitoring Concentration Section 15, creatingNR405.07(8)(a)3m. PM2 

### .s Significant Monitoring Concentration (Note) Section 16, amendingNR Changes to address NOx as a precursorto 405.07(8)(a)5.(Note) ozone 

### Wisconsin requests a SIP revision for onlythese sections ofBoard OrderAM-15-14. AM-15-14 also contains amendments to the definition ofvolatile organic compounds inNR400, changes to the rule language inNR420, andrepeal ofseveral outdated code sections related to the vaporrecoveryprogram. Wisconsin is not requesting a SIP revision for these additional proposed rule changes atthis time. In February of2016, we hadrequested parallel processing ofthis SIP revision so that EPA could be readyfor rulemaking when the changes to chs. NR404 andNR405, Wis. Adm. Code were fmalized, andto assist Wisconsin in meeting the 2-yeartimeframe to rectifythe noted deficiencies. Nowthatthis rule is final we are replacingthe previous submittal with this request. Attachments submittedwiththe February 2016letter included a promulgation schedule for the fmal rules. We are now supplying EPA with additional informationto fmalize this request. In 

### accordance with EPA's final rule on CAA Section 110 submission requirements effective March 16,2015 [ 80 FR7336], this SIP is being submitted using EPA's electronic SIP (eSIP) submission system. Please contact Ralph Patterson at 608-267-7546 ifyou have any questions. Sincerely, 

# jkLL'{"**/~o-vz{** Gail Good, AirManagementProgram Director Cc: DougAburano, USEPA-RegionV (AR-18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3507 Ralph Patterson, WDNR Kristin Hmt, WDNR

Attachments

### Page 3
I. The January 2016 NaturalResources Rule Package (also known as the Green Sheet Package) containing a background memo, fiscal estimate and economic impact analysis, and rule AM-15-14 2. Final Adopted RuleAM-15-14 3. SIP Checklist 4. AM-15-14 Public Hearingnotice- DNRdid notreceive any comments onAM-15-14 atthe November 5, 2015 public hearing 5. Newspapertare sheet showing Class I publichearingnotice 6. SIP celiification

# I 

# I

I 

# ITHIS FORM WAS GENERATED BY THE eSIPS SYSTEM 1 

### eSIPS (electronic State Implementation Plan Submission) Summary Report
Note: This report is a summary of your submission to the electronic SIP (eSIPS) system and is not to be used as the official record for your SIP submission. Date of Report 08/09/2016 6:50:45 Form Status Complete 

# eSIP SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Submission Title WIDNR_PM25PSD_08092016 Pollutants Affected Pb (2008), Ozone (8 hr 2008), SO2 (2010), PM2.5 (2012 Annual) Submittal Category/Categories ISIP - Infrastructure SIP - The plan which addresses any of the infrastructure elements and any related regulations submitted to satisfy the requirements of that specific NAAQS, PSD - Permitting Regulations (PSD/NNSR) Other Submittal Category Submittal Category Description Includes information to address disapprovals and findings of failure in 77 FR 35870, 79 FR 46704, 80 FR 76637. Geographic Area Affected Statewide Are you requesting parallel processing for this SIP Revision? No 

# eSIP PARALLEL PROCESSING Not applicable 

# eSIP ADMINISTRATIVE EVIDENCE COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST

 1.Submittal letter from Governor or designee requesting approval of the plan or revision.  2.Evidence of adoption. Date adopted 1/6/2015 Date effective 8/1/2016  3.Evidence of legal authority to adopt and implement revision.  3(a).Copy of final adopted plan and/or rule.  3(b).Indication of changes to existing plan and/or rule if applicable.  4.Evidence that state followed procedural requirements for adoption/issuance of plan.  4(a).Evidence of public notice. Date Public Notice Provided 9/28/2015THIS FORM WAS GENERATED BY THE eSIPS SYSTEM 2 5.Was a public hearing requested and/or held? Yes 5(a).Date of first public hearing. 11/5/2015 Date of second public hearing Date of third public hearing  5(b).Evidence that public hearing was held. 6.Were public comments received? Yes  6(a).Compilation of public comments and state responses or declaration that no comments were received. 

# eSIP ADMINISTRATIVE EVIDENCE – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Attachment File Description GreenSheet.pdf DNR Board Rule Information AM1514Augustsubmittalletter.pdf August 2016 Transmittal Information PublicHearingNotice.pdf Public Hearing Notice SIPCert.pdf SIP Certification Additional Information regarding this submittal: Please enter any additional information regarding this submittal. Wisconsin Register Publication go to https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/register/2016/727B/register and click on CR-077 

# eSIP TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT INFORMATION – AS APPLICABLE Are there Technical Support Documents included in this submittal? No The Technical Support Document should contain the following (if applicable):  List of Pollutants affected by plan  Location of sources affected by plan  Quantification of allowable emissions  Demonstrate change meets NAAQS, PSD, RFP and/or visibility requirements  Modeling information supporting the revision  Evidence reductions are based on continuous emissions reduction technology  Emission limits, work practices, record keeping, etc.  Compliance with enforcement strategies  Special economic and technological justifications per applicable EPA policies  OtherTHIS FORM WAS GENERATED BY THE eSIPS SYSTEM 3 Please describe all other Technical Support Documents 

# eSIP TECHNICAL SUPPORT – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION
Attachment File Description

This SIP submission includes additional documentation (e.g., large modeling files) that is not submitted through this electronic system? No
This information will be provided to EPA via:Form 1100
-001P (Rev

. 09/15) Wisconsin Departmentof Natural Resources 

### Natural Resources Board Agenda Item Item No

. 3 •A. 1 •

SUBJECT: Request that the Board adopt AM-15-14, proposed rules affecting chapters NR 172, 400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, 484, and 494 related to consistency with Federal rules and repeal ofobsolete rules

. FOR: January, 2016 Board meeting PRESENTER'S NAME AND TITLE: Kristin Hart, Chief, Air Permit and Stationary Source Modeling Section SUMMARY: Changes to rules implementing majorsource air pollution control construction permitting are proposed and are necessary to assure consistency with corresponding U

.S. EPA regulations. In addition, repeal is proposed forobsolete rules requiring the control ofvapors resulting from vehicle refueling activity at gasoline stations (Stage 2 Vapor Recovery)

. The proposed changes to rules addressing consistencywith U

.S

. EPA regulations include:

- Explicitly naming oxides of nitrogen (NOx) as a precursor to ozone
.

- Adopting U.S

. EPA increment concentrations for particulate matterwith an aerodynamic diameter of2

.5

micrometers or less (PM2.s)

.

- Including PM2.5 in certain definitions.

- Changing the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 to 0

.

- Updating the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC) to exclude certain chemicals determined by EPA to

have negligible photochemical reactivity in forming ground level ozone. The proposed repeal ofobsolete rules includes:

- Repeal ofch

. NR 172covering grants previously provided by the Department to assistance gasoline station owners

with the installation of Stage 2 Vapor Recovery equipment.

- Repeal ofs
. NR 420.045 and related rules implementing the Stage 2 Vapor Recovery requirements

. The proposed rule changes are notexpected to be controversial. Some concern was raised in the response to the solicitation for information on the economic impacts ofthe rule, that adopting the PM2.6 increment could be costly to some sources. While adoption ofthe PM2• 5 incrementwill require some additional analysis the Department does not anticipate that this additional analysis will cause noticeable delays in permit Issuance times and therefore, will not result in any siqnificant impact to the affected businesses. The board last acted on this rule on January 28, 2015, approving the scope statement and authorizing hearings

. The rule is not expected to have a negative economic impacton small business

.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt AM-15-14

. LIST OF ATTACHED MATERIALS (check all that are applicable): 

### 181 Background memo 

### 181 Fiscal estimate and economic Impact analysis (EIA) form 

## 0 Response summary Approved by Gail Good, Air Program Director Patrick Stevens, Environmental Management Division Administrator Cathy Stepp, Secretary

cc: Board Liaison
- AD/8 

### 0 Attachments to background memo 

### D Environmental assessment or impact s tatement 

## 181 Board order/rule Date

Department ruleofficer
- LS/8

### State of Wisconsin 

## CORRESPONDENCE/MEMORANDUM-------------

DATE: December 18,2015 TO: All Members ofthe Natural Resources Board FROM: Cathy Stepp, Secretary SUBJECT: Background memo on request for Board adoption ofOrderAM-15-14, proposed rules affecting chapters NR 172, 400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, 484, and 494, relating to consistency with Federal rules and repeal ofobsolete rules.

1. Why is the rule being proposed? This rule package contains changes that are necessary to resolve severalU.S. EPA deficiency notices on our state implementation plan. (see Finding ofFailure to Submit a PSD State Implementation Plan Revision for 

### PM 25, published at 79 Fed. Reg. 46703 (August 11, 2014); Disapproval oflnfrastructure SIP With Respect to Oxides ofNitrogen as a Precursor to Ozone Provisions for the 2006 

### PM 25 NAAQS, published at 80 Fed. Reg. 76637 (December 10, 2015)). The Departmentis also required to promulgate the 

### PM 25increment section ofthis rule by no later than March 31, 2017 underthe May21, 2015 Stipulation and Order for Judgment for Midwest EnvironmentalDefense Center, Inc. v Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Dane County CaseNo. 14-CV-3366. 2. Summaryofthe rule. The objective ofthis rule is twofold; to address changes needed to maintain consistency withU.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) regulations and to repeal obsolete rule provisions. The portion ofthe rule addressing consistency with EPA rules includes the following:
• explicitly names oxides ofnitrogen (NOx) as a precursorto ozone, • adopts federal increment concentrations for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5), • includes PM2.5 in certain definitions inch. NR405, • changes the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 to 0 and • updates the definition ofVolatile Organic Compounds (VOC's) to exclude certain chemicals with negligible photochemical reactivity. The portion ofthe rule that repeals obsolete rules includes:
• repeal ofch. NR 172 covering grants for installation ofstate 2 vapor recovery, and • repeal ofs. NR420.045 and related rules concerning implementation ofstage 2 vapor recovery. Stage 2 vapor recovery rules required gasoline vapor recovery equipmentto be installed at gas stations in Southeastern Wisconsin. The EPA authorized states to remove these rules from state implementation plans because, since 1998 model year, cars have contained on-board vapor recovery systems. The stage 2 vapor recovery equipment has been shown to interfere withthe operation ofon-board systems. The proposed rule also contains the repeal ofthe now obsolete NR 172 which authorized the Departmentto implement a grant program to assist gas station owners with the installation ofstage 2 vapor recovery equipment.
3. How does this proposal affect existing policy? Page 1 

### of4 Printed on RI'!CvcleJ

PaperThis rule fulfills existing department policy to assure consistency ofthe major source air permitprogram with EPA regulations. Other portions ofthis rule do not affect airprogram policy. 4. Hearing Synopsis and Comment Summary. A notice ofpublic hearings on the proposed rule was published on October 5, 2015. A hearing was held on November 5, 2015. No one attended the public hearing. The public comment period closed on November 12, 2015. A comment was received from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region V staffpointing out a typo in one ofthe chemicals being excluded from the list ofVOC's. No other comments from the public were received. The Legislative Council Rules Clearinghouse recommended changes related to clarity, grammar, punctuation and use ofplain language. All recommended changes were accepted and appropriate changes made, except for a question raised concerningwhether the phrase "24 hour average," should be retained in the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 ins. NR405.07(8)(a)3m. Since the EPA regulation, in 40 CPR 51.166, does not include the phrase, the Department did not retain the phrase in orderto maintain consistency and thereby avoid any potential confusion. 5. Has Board dealt with these issues before? Yes, the board approved the scope statement and authorized hearings on January 28,2015. 6. Who will be impacted by the proposed rule? How? The proposed rule could potentially impact several different types ofbusiness. The portion ofthe rule that is being proposed to assure consistency with EPA rules applies mostly to major sources ofair pollution that are being constructed or undergoing modification. However, the state implements the major source construction permitprogram according to EPA rules immediately upon their promulgation in federal law and so, facilities undergoing major new source review should see no effect from this rule. Another portion ofthe rule includes adding chemicals to the list ofthose excluded from being considered a volatile organic compound (VOC). These chemicals are used predominantly bymanufacturers of refrigerants and refrigeration equipment, hot water heaters, and waste heat recovery equipment, manufactures ofaerosol propellants, blowing agents for insulating foams, and fire suppressants, and in the manufacture ofpigments used in water-based coatings, additives in metalworking fluids and infood contactpaper, neutralizers in personal care products, and intermediates in chemical synthesis. EPA excluded these chemicals from their regulatory definition ofVOC because they have very low photochemical reactivity and therefore, do notparticipate in ground level ozone formation. Adoptingthis rule into state law will clarifY requirements and remove these chemicals from being regulated as a VOC. The portion ofthe rule thatproposes to repeal regulations concerning stage 2 vapor recovery at gas stations and the stage 2 vapor recovery grant rule, affects the owners and operators ofgas stations in Southeastern Wisconsin. Beginningwith 1998 model yearvehicles, EPAbegan requiring auto manufacturers to equip new vehicles with on-board gasoline vapor recovery systems. Stage 2 vapor recovery atthe gas pump became obsolete as these rules were implemented. Since the on-board vapor recovery systems serve the same purpose as the stage 2 vapor recovery equipment at the gas stations, the EPA authorized states to remove stage 2 vapor recovery rules from their ozone state implementation plans (SIP) making the rules covering stage 2 vapor recovery and the stage 2 vapor recovery grantrule obsolete. Page 2 

### of4

### 7. Soliciting public input on economic impact analysis. An analysis ofthe economic impacts ofthis proposed rule was prepared after information was obtained through a request concerning potential economic impacts ofthe proposed rule. The request for information was sent to all air permit holders in the state, representatives oflocal units ofgovernment, representatives ofbusiness, and the AirManagement Study Group which includes members from environmental advocacy groups, environmental consultants, environmental law attorneys, utilities, and representatives oflarge and small businesses. The Department received eleven responses to the request for information on economic impacts. Nine of the responses indicated that the proposed rule would have no economic impact or wrote in support ofthe new rules as positive to business. Two responders indicated that implementation ofPM2.5 increment would have a negative economic impact on their businesses ifthe Departmentrequires testing to determine PM2.5 emissions in order to ascertain compliance with increment. The Department continues to believe that impacts ofadopting the PM2.5 increment will be minimal to businesses because the Departmenthas proposed a new approach for determining whether a new project will comply withPM2.5 increment. This new approach treats PM2.5 as a regional pollutant and does not rely on emissions data from individual businesses. 8. Environmental Analysis. The promulgation ofpermanent administrative rules under ch. 227, Wis. Stats., is considered an equivalent analysis action under s. NR 150.20 (2) (a) 23., Wis. Adm. Code, and does not require additional environmental analysis under ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code, because under emergency rule EmR1517 in effect throughMarch 5, 2016 and published in the current Wisconsin Register, a detailed environmental analysis and public disclosure are conducted as part ofthe Department programmatic procedure. 9. Small Business Analysis. The changes proposed in this rule addressing consistency with EPA rules are not expected to have an adverse economic impact on small businesses. Small businesses are usually not major sources for purposes ofthe major source air pollution control construction permit program (PSD program) because theytend not to have large amounts ofemissions. Since the Department is already implementing the PSD program, as required byU.S. EPA, the consistency changes beingproposed in this rule will not have any additional economic impacts. The adoption ofthe PM2.5 increment mayrequire additional analysis bythe Department during the air construction permit review for some small businesses constructing or expanding in certain parts ofthe state. The Department does not anticipate that this additional analysis will cause noticeable delays in permit issuance times and therefore, will notresult in any significant impact to the affected small businesses. The portion ofthe rule that proposes to exclude certaincompounds from the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC) to make the rule consistent with the definition in federal regulations will provide clarity to businesses in how to calculate and report VOC emissions and on the applicability ofregulations.

Page 3 of4The proposed repeal ofthe stage 2 vapor recovery program and related implementing rules will clarifY applicable requirements for the affected small businesses and is not expected to have an adverse impact on them. This rule is expected to positively impact owners and operators ofgas stations in Southeastern Wisconsin, most ofwhich are considered small businesses. This rule repeals outdated rule language makingthe regulations easierto understand.

Page 4 of4STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION OF EXECUTIVE BUDGET AND FINANCE 101 EAST WILSON STREET, 10TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 7864 MADISON, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608} 267-0372 

### Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis

1. Type of Estimate and Analysis 18] Original 

### D Updated 0Corrected 2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number Chapters NR 172, 400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, 484, and 494. 3. Subject Proposed rules related to consistency with U. S. Environmental Protection Agency air pollution regulations and repeal of obsolete rules. 4. Fund Sources Affected 

### D GPR 

### D FED [g) PRO 

### D PRS 

### D SEG 

### D SEG-S 6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule [gJ No Fiscal Effect 

### D Increase Existing Revenues 

### D Indeterminate 

### D Decrease Existing Revenues
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply) 5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected NA 

### D Increase Costs 

### D Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget 

### D Decrease Cost 

### D State's Economy [g) Specific Businesses/Sectors 

### D Local Government Units 

### D Public Utility Rate Payers 18] Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A) 8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? DYes [g) No 9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule The objective ofthisrulemaking is twofold; to address changes needed to maintain consistency with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations and to repeal obsolete rule provisions. The Department is the approved authority in the state to implement and enforce many ofthe federal regulations under the Clean AirAct. This authority is based on a State Implementation Plan submitted to and approved byU.S. EPA. In order to maintain a sufficient State Implementation Plan, the proposed changes to chs. NR404 and 405 addressed by this rule package are required by U.S. EPA. 10. Summary ofthe businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments. The Department anticipates that some portions ofthe proposed rule could potentially impact any air permit holder in the state. Other entities thatmay have an interest in the economic impacts ofthe proposed rule include organizations that represent business in the state including the Small Business Environmental Council, the Printing Council, the Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the Wisconsin Paper Council, and the American Council ofEngineering Companies ofWisconsin. The Public Service Commission ofWisconsin and organizations representing local units ofgovernment including the League ofWisconsinMunicipalities and the Wisconsin Counties Association may also have an interest. In addition, the Wisconsin the AirManagement Study Group, the Air Program's stakeholder working group, may be interested in the economic impacts ofthis proposed rule. This group includes members representing Clean Wisconsin, Sierra Club, environmental law attorneys, utilities, and representatives oflarge and small businesses. The Department contacted all these entities, and others, for information on the economic impacts ofthe proposed rule changes. 11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development ofthis EIA. No local governmental units asked to pm1icipate in, or did participate, in preparation ofthe final economic impact analysis. 12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be 

### 1STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION OF EXECUTIVE BUDGET AND FINANCE 101 EAST WILSON STREET, 10TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 7864 MADISON, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608) 267-0372 

### Fiscal Estimate & 

### Economic Impact Analysis Incurred) Fiscal Impacts on the Department's Air Management Program The Department does not anticipate that this proposed rule will have a fiscal impact onthe Air Management Program or any other DNRprograms. Economic Impacts on Private SectorBusinesses
Sections 3 through 10 and 12 ofthe board order for AM-15-14 propose rules to adopt the federally established ambient air increment for 

### PM 25. The Department expects that this proposed rule change will have no economic impact for most private sector businesses. An ambient air increment is the maximum increase in the concentration ofa pollutant above a base line amount that is allowed to occur. Significant deterioration in air quality is said to occur when the amount of new pollution would exceed the applicable ambient air increment. It is importantto note that the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for a pollutant may not be exceeded even where the increase in the concentration ofthe pollutant is lower than the ambient air increment. The Department may not issue a permit and a business may not begin the construction project until the Department determines that the emissions from the construction project will not cause or exacerbate a violation ofan ambient air standard or increment. The Department does not expectthat adopting the federally established ambient air increment for 

### PM 25 will have a significant effect on the approvability ofconstruction permits in Wisconsin, and therefore should not have an economic impact on private sector businesses. PM2.5 is not emitted directly from most industrial operations. High temperature operations such as fuel burning, engine testing, and metal melting, may emit 

### PM 25 directly. When reviewing minor source construction permit applications for these types of sources, the Department has taken a weight ofevidence approach and demonstrated that potential direct emitters of

### PM 25 have not caused or exacerbated a violation ofan ambient air quality standard or the ambient air increment and have therefore notrequired individual source modeling analyses to make this determination. The Department does not anticipate that a business would have to make design changes or purchase emission control equipment for PM2.5 as a result ofthe proposal to adopt the federal PM25 ambient air increments. The Department began including PM2.5 increment analyses in major source air construction permit reviews (PSD permits) when U.S. EPA first adopted the new increment. Applications for major source constructionpermits in affected areas, must include an increment analysis whichrequires knowledge ofemissions ofthe affected pollutant from nearby minor sources. Because ofthe Department's decision to no longer use individual source dispersion modelingto evaluate increment at minor sources, there may be a slight increase in the time required to prepare a major source application to include information on PM25 from those nearby minor sources. However, the Department believes this workload would be slight because, aside from combustion units whose emissions are easily estimated, very few sources directly emit 

### PM2.s· Sections 14 and 15 ofthe board order for AM-15-14, the portion oftherule that removes the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5, will notresult in any change to the method ofreviewing air permits in Wisconsin, and therefore is not anticipated to have any economic impact. One requirement for major source construction pmmit applicants is to provide an estimate ofpre-construction air quality, including up to one-year ofsite specific ambient air monitoring data. The significant monitoring concentration was originally established in federal lawto allow a dispersion modeling analysis to be used to demonstrate that the potential increase ofground level pollutant concentration is small enough that site specific pre-construction monitoring is not required. The U. S. EPA removed the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 from its rules and the Department now is proposing this change to maintain consistency with federal law. Removal ofthe significant monitoring concentration will not have an effect on major source construction 

### 2STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION OF EXECUTIVE BUDGET AND FINANCE 101 EAST WILSON STREET, 10TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 7864 MADISON, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608) 267-0372 

### Fiscal Estimate & 

### Economic Impact Analysis permit applicants as Wisconsin maintains a wide spread, federally compliant network ofPM2.5 ambient monitors that are used to assess pre-construction air quality for major source construction permit applicants in all parts ofthe state. Sections 

### 11 and 13 and 16 ofthe board order is the portion ofthe rule that specifically names oxides ofnitrogen (NOx) as a precursorto ozone. Because the Department recognizes NOx as an ozone precursor under cunentrules and considers NOx emissions when reviewing federally required permits, the proposed rules do not constitute a change in Depmiment policy or procedures and therefore the proposed rules will not have any economic impact. Section 

### 1ofthe board order for AM-15-14, the pmiion ofthe rule that proposes to amend the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOCs) to exclude additional substances, will align the state and federal definitions ofVOC. Coating, painting, printing and othertypes ofbusinesses that use organic compounds will no longer be required to count the listed substances as VOCs. This proposed change will not have a negative economic impact and may, in fact, have an economic benefitto businesses that emit VOCs, including being able to quality for construction and operation permit exemptions orto show the business qualifies for coverage under a general or registration permit.
Sections 17 through 24 ofthe board order for AM-15-14 involve repealing the stage 2 vapor recovery regulations and related grant rules in ch. NR 172 for gas stations in Southeastern Wisconsin. These changes will not have any economic impact on businesses in Wisconsin because the state has not been implementingthe rule since 2012, as required under s. 285.31, Wis. Stats. The U.S. EPA authorized states to remove these rules from state implementation plans, which Wisconsin did in 2013. Grant funding for removal ofStage 2 VaporRecovery systems was available through the end of the 2 year budget cycle ending on June 30, 2015. This proposed rule is simplythe last stage ofcleaning up these now obsolete requirements. 

### Economic Impacts on local governments and public entities
The Department does not anticipate that local governments and public entities will be economically impacted bythe implementation ofthe proposed rules. 13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule This rule change was undertaken to align state regulations with Clean AirAct regulations. The Department is the approved authority in the state to implement Clean AirAct permit programs and Department rules must be consistent with U.S. EPA regulations to maintain that authority. Ifthe state does not make the proposed rule changes, the U.S. EPA may potentially disapprove portions ofthe state's permit program and couldtake over review and issuance ofpermits. The Department believes that it is better equipped at this time than U.S. EPA to efficiently and effectively issue quality air permits in the state without causing undue delays to business needs. This is a significant benefit ofadopting these proposed rule changes. 14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule The Department does not anticipate any long tenn fiscal or economic implications to implementingthe rule. 15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government All ofthe changes beingproposed in this rule are necessmyto align state rules with federal regulations. 16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota) Illinois and Minnesota are direct delegated states, implementingthe federal prograiTI immediately after federal rules are effective, and are not implementingtheirprograms through a State Implementation Plan (SIP) as Wisconsin does. Iowa and Michigan, similar to Wisconsin, are SIP approved states, so they are also implementing a federal program, but through their own state rules. It is the goal ofSIP-approved states to implement federal programs in accordance with the regulations set out in federal code. This proposed rule implements changes needed to align with federal regulations and, 

### 3STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION OF EXECUTIVE BUDGETAND FINANCE 101 EAST WILSON STREET, 10TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 7864 MADISON, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608) 267-0372 

### Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis thus, result in rules similarto those in neighboring states. 17. Contact Name Kristin Hart 18. Contact Phone Number 

### 608/266-6876 This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.



### 4STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012) 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RULES DIVISION OF EXECUTIVE BUDGET AND FINANCE 101 EAST WILSON STREET, 10TH FLOOR P.O. BOX7864 MADISON, WI 53707-7864 FAX: (608) 26HJ372 

### Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis



### ATTACHMENT A

1. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred) The proposed rule is expected to have no impact for many businesses and 

### itmay create, for small businesses that regularly emit VOCs such as printers, coaters, spraypainting operations, and autobody repair shops, an economic benefit. Because emissions ofce11ain compounds will no longer be consideredVOC emissions, small business emitting these compounds may be able to qualify for construction and operation pennit exemptions or may become eligible for coverage under a more streamlined permit option such as a general orregistration permit. 2. Summary ofthe data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses Because the Department does not expect a negative economic impact on small businesses, no data sources were examined for this analysis. 3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact ofthe Rule on Small Businesses? D Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements D Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting D Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements D Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards D Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements D Other, describe:
4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses No special methods are being incorporated into the rule to reduce impacts. The Department does not believe there will be negative economic impacts to small business. 5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions

NA 6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form) DYes [gl No



### 5ORDER OF THE STATE OF WISCONSINNATURAL RESOURCES BOARD REPEALING, AMENDING, AND CREATINGRULES The WisconsinNaturalResourcesBoardproposes anorderto 

### repealNR 172, 420.02 (8m), (26), (32), and (38m), 420.045,425.035,439.06 (3) (i), 484.05 (4) and (5), and 494.04; to 

### amendNR404.05 (2) (intro.), (3) (intro.), (4) (intro.), 405.02 (3), (21) (a), (21m) (a), (22) (b), (22m) (a) 1. and (b) 1., and (27) (a) 6., 405.07 (8) (a) 3m. and 5. (Note), 420.02 (39), 420.03 (4) (b) 3., and420.04 (1) (b) 4. and (3) (c) 1.; and to 

### createNR400.02 (162) (a) 53. to 60., 404.05 (2) (am), (3) (am), (4) (am), 405.02 (21m) (c), (22m) (a) 3., 405.07 (8) (a) 3m. (Note) relatingto consistencywithU.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency airpollution control regulations and the repeal ofobsolete rules, and affecting small business. 

### AM-15-14 Analysis Prepared by the Department ofNatural Resources 1. Statute interpreted: Sections 285.11 (1) and (6), Stats. The State Implementation Plan developed under s. 285.11(6), Stats., will be revised. 

### 2. Statutory authority: Sections 285.11 (1), (6), (16), and (17), 285.17 (l)(a), 285.21 (2) and (4), 285.25 (1), and 285.31 (5), Wis. Stats., establish the authority for promulgation ofthe proposed rules. 

### 3. Explanation ofagency authority: (A) Section 285.11 (1), Wis. Stats., requires thatthe Department promulgate rules implementing and consistent with ch. 285, Wis. Stats., and thereby establishes authority for the proposed changes to ch. NR 405, Wis. Adm. Code, related to the prevention ofsignificant deterioration permit program as affected by ss. 285.60, 285.61, and 285.63, Wis. Stats. More specific authority for these proposed changes is established as follows: (1) Section 285.11 (16), Wis. Stats., requires that the Department promulgate rules, consistent with but no more restrictive than the federal Clean Air Act, that specifY the amounts ofemissions that result in a stationary source being classified as a major source and limit the classification ofa major source to specific air contaminants. Section 285.11 (17), Wis. Stats requires the Department to promulgate rules, consistent with the federal Clean Air Act, that modifY the meaning ofthe term "modification" as it relates to specific air contaminants. These statutory provisions support the Department's proposed changes to ch. NR 405, Wis. Adm. Code, to identifY nitrogen oxides (NOx) as a precursorto ozone formation is consistent with federal Clean Air Actrequirements regarding what contaminants to consider when determining whether a source is a major source and describe when an increase in a given air contaminant is considered a modification. (2) Section 285.17 (1) (a), Wis. Stats., requires the Department to classifY byrule the level ofan air contaminant source that may cause or contribute to air pollution. This statute supports the proposed change to the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 which is established as a threshold below which major source construction permit applicants are not required to provide pre-construction air quality monitoring data. (3) Section 285.21 (2) and (4), Wis. Stats., supports the Depatiment's proposed change to establish ambient air increments for PM2.5. These statutory provisions require that the Department promulgate byrule ambient air increments for air contaminants consistent with, and not more restrictive than, those under the federal Clean Air Act for attainment areas. The Department mustkeep these rules consistent with any modifications to these increments made underthe Clean Air Act. (4) Section 285.25 (1), Wis. Stats., supports the Department's proposed changes to add PM2.5 to select definitions inch. NR405, Wis. Adm. Code, related to a pollutant's baseline concentration. This statute requires that the Departmentpromulgate rules designating procedures and criteriato determine the


### 1allocation ofavailable air resources in an attainment area. The terms affected are used in these procedures and the proposed inclusion ofPM 2.5 in the relevant definitions is necessary and appropriate when the Depmtment dete1mines the allocation ofairresources for PM2.5. (B) Section 285.11 (6), Wis. Stats., establishes authority for the proposed change to the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC), by adding compounds to the list ofthose excluded from the definition. This statute requires thatthe Department develop a plan for the prevention, abatement, and control ofair pollution. For control ofatmospheric ozone, the plan, with limited exceptions, must conform to the federal Clean AirAct. Since VOC are a precursor to ozone, the addition ofthe proposed compounds to the list ofthose excluded from the defmition ensures thatthe state definition ofVOC conforms to the federal defmition. (C) The proposed repeal ofs. NR 420.045, Wis. Adm. Code, along with other rules related to its implementation are consistent with the legislature's mandate under s. 285.31 (5), Wis. Stats., to terminate the further implementation ofstage 2 vapor recover equipmentrequirements. 4. Related statute or rule: Related to the proposed repeal ofs. NR 420.045, the state legislature promulgated s. 285.31 (5), Wis. Stats., effective Aprill7, 2012, terminating the further implementation ofstage 2 vapor recover equipmentrequirements under s. NR420.045, Wis. Adm. Code. 5. Plain language analysis: The Departmenthas two main objectives in proposingthese rules; to address changes neededto maintain consistency with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations and to repeal obsolete rule provisions. (A) Consistency. (1) ChapterNR405, Wis. Adm. Code, establishes requirements and procedures for reviewing and issuing air pollution control construction permits for any new major stationary source and any major modification to an existing stationary source located in areas designated as in attainment with national ambient air quality standards or as unclassifiable. This permitprogram is referred to as prevention of significant deterioration or PSD and is based on U.S. EPA regulations in 40 CPR 51.166. The Department is the approved authority in the state to implement and enforce many ofthe federal regulations underthe Clean Air Act. This authority is based on a State Implementation Plan submitted to and approved by U.S. EPA. In orderto maintain a sufficient State Implementation Plan, the proposed changes to cbs. NR 404 and 405 addressed by this rule package are required. The Department is proposing changes to maintain consistency with existing U. S. EPA regulations inthree areas: a., identifying nitrogen oxides as a precursor to ozone; b., updatingrequirements concerning particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5); and c., amending the definition ofvolatile organic compound by adding 8 compounds to the list ofcompounds with negligible photochemical reactivity. These are each described further below: a. Sections NR405.02 (21) (a), (22) (b), (27) (a) (6) and 405.07 (8) (a) 5., Wis. Adm. Code, to specifically identify that, in addition to volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides (NOx) are a precursor to ozone formation consistent with U.S. EPA requirements in 40 CPR 51.166 (b) and (i). b. 1. SectionNR 404.05, Wis. Adm. Code, to adopt ambient air increments for PM2.5. Ambient air increments for pollutants with national ambient air quality standards, including PM2.5, are established bythe U.S. EPA in 40 CPR 51.166 (c), and 2. SectionNR 405.02 (3), (21m), and (22m), Wis. Adm. Code, to include PM2.5 inthe definitions of"baseline area", "major source baseline date", and "minor source baseline date", respectively. These terms are defined by the U.S. EPA in 40 CPR 51.166 (b) (14) (i) and (ii) and (15) (i). 3. SectionNR405.07 (8) (a) 3m. to change the significant monitoring concentration for PM2.5 to zero in accordance withSierra Club v. EPA, 706 F.3d428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). c. ChapterNR400, Wis. Adm. Code, establishes definitions for terms commonly used throughout chs. NR401 to 499, Wis. Adm. Code. A definition for the term 'volatile organic compounds' or 'VOC' is included in s. NR 400.02 (162), Wis. Adm. Code. In the ambient air these compounds can participate in

2photochemical reactions to produce ozone, more commonly referred to as smog, and are therefore subject to emission control requirements and may trigger the need to obtain a construction or operation permit. The U.S. EPA has determined that certain organic compounds have negligible photochemical reactivity in the atmosphere and therefore excludes them from the federal definition ofVOC in 40 CFR51.100 (s). To maintain consistency with federal rule, the Depmtment proposes to add these eight compounds to the list of excluded compounds in the state definition. These compounds are: 1. Trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HF0-1234ze). 2. HCF2 0CF2 H (HFE-134). 3. HCF2 0CF2 0CF2 H (HFE-236cal2). 4. HCF20CF2 CF20CF2H (HFE-338pcc13). 5. HCF2 0CF2 0CF2 CF2 0CF2H (H-Galden 1040X or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180). 6. Trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene (SolsticeTM 1233zd(E)). 7. 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HF0-1234yf). 8. 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP; CAS number 124-68-5). (B) Obsolete Rules. In addition to the changes described above to maintain consistency with U.S. EPA regulations, the Department is also proposing to repeal the stage 2 vapor recovery regulations ins. NR420.045 and make clean-up changes to associated rules provisions, including the repeal ofgrant rules in ch. NR 172 for gas stations in Southeastern Wisconsin. Stage 2 vapor recovety equipment captures volatile organic compounds that evaporate into the air whenvehicle gasoline tanks are filled and returns the vapors to the underground gasoline storage tank where they condense. Beginning with 1998 model year vehicles, the U.S. EPA began requiring manufactures to equip newvehicles with on-board gasoline vapor recovery systems. These systems serve the same purpose as the stage 2 vapor recovery equipment at gasoline dispensing facilities. The U.S. EPA authorized states to remove stage 2 vapor recovery equipment requirements from their ozone state implementation plan (SIP) which Wisconsin did, effective December 4, 2013. 6. Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal statutes and regulations: The Department is proposing changes inch. NR405, Wis. Adm. Code, to address changes needed to maintain consistency with U. S. EPA regarding rules for issuing construction permits for any new major stationary source and any major modification to an existing stationary source located in areas designated as in attainment with national ambient air quality standards or as unclassifiable. These changes are needed to conform with federal requirements in three areas: identifying nitrogen oxides as a precursor to ozone consistent with 40 CFR51.166; updating the ambient air increment and the significantmonitoring concentration for PM2.5 consistent with 40 CFR51.166; and adding 8 compounds to the list of compounds with negligible photochemical reactivity consistent with the federal definition ofVOC in 40 CFR51.100 (s) To address consistency with U.S. EPA regarding nitrogen oxides (NOx) as a precursor to ozone, the Department is proposing changes to Sections NR405.02 (21) (a), (22) (b), (27) (a) (6) and 405.07 (8) (a) 5., Wis. Adm. Code, to specifically identify that, in addition to volatile organic compounds, NOx emissions are a precursor to ozone fmmation consistent with U.S. EPA requirements in 40 CFR 51.166 (b) and (i). To address consistency with U.S. EPA regarding particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5), the Department is proposing rule changes in three areas: (A) Section 404.05 to add the Class I, Class II, and Class ill increment values to ch. NR404 as established in 40 CFR 51.166 (c); (B) Section 405.02 (3), (21m), and (22m), to include PM2.5 in the definitions of"baseline area", "major source baseline date", and "minor source baseline date", consistent with federal regulations in 40 CFR51.166 (b); and (C) Section 405.07 (8) (a) 3m., to adopt the significantmonitoring concentration for PM2.5 of zero (0) as required in 40 CFR 51.166 (i) (5) (i) (c);


### 3To address consistency with U. S. EPA regarding the definition ofVOC, the Department proposes to add eight compounds to the list ofexcluded compounds in the state definition in s. NR400.02 (162), Wis. Adm. Code. This is consistent with the federal definition ofVOC in 40 CFR 51.100 (s). 7. Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota): This proposed rule implements changes needed to assure consistency between state and federal rules and thus, result in rules similar to those in neighboring states. Illinois and Minnesota are direct delegated states, meaning thatthey are implementing directly the federal program and are not implementingtheir programs through a State Implementation Plan (SIP), as Wisconsin does. Iowa and Michigan, similarto Wisconsin, are SIP-approved states, so they are implementingthe same federal programs, but through their own state rules. It is the goal ofSIP-approved states to implement federal programs in accordance with the regulations set out in federal code. This results in similar requirements fi·om state to state. 8. Summary offactual data and analytical methodologies used and how any related findings support the regulatory approach chosen: Since the Department is proposing rules consistent with federal regulations, making consistency and clarification changes, and repealing rules as directed by the state legislature, the Department did not make use ofany factual data or analytical methodologies in the rule development. 9. Analysis and supporting documents used to determine the effect on small business or in preparation ofan economic impact report: The economic impact ofthe proposed rule is expectedto be minimal. When U.S. EPA adopts changes to the federal major air pollution control construction permit program, the Department immediately implements those changes through the state's construction permitting program. Forthis reason, the consistency changes being proposed, that specifically name NOx as a precursor to ozone, will not have any additional economic impact on facilities obtainingmajor source air pollution construction permits (PSD permits). The adoption ofthe PM2.5 increment will require additional analysis during the air construction permit reviews for minor sources (which may be small businesses) wishing to expand in areas where increment must be analyzed. However, because the Department has developed a weight ofevidence approach to evaluate PM2.5 emissions against the increment, the Department does notanticipate that this additional analysis will cause noticeable delays in minor source permit issuance times and therefore, will not result in any significant impact to small businesses. The Department has not been implementingthe stage 2 vapor recovery program since 2012 when the state legislature terminated further implementation. Repeal ofthese outdated rules clarifies applicable requirements for the affected businesses and is not expectedto have an adverse economic impact on them. As noted above, U.S. EPA already approved the removal ofthese requirements from Wisconsin's SIP. The portion ofthe rule that proposes to change the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC) to make the rule consistent with the definition in federal regulations will provide clarityto businesses in how to calculate and report VOC emissions and on the applicability ofregulations. This change is not expected to have a negative economic impact on businesses and, since the proposed change is specifically to exclude some organic compounds from the definition ofVOC, the rule change could have a small, positive economic impact on certain facilities that use the excluded compounds. 10. Effect on small business (initial regulatory flexibility analysis): The changes proposed in this rule are not expectedto have an adverse economic impact on businesses, including small businesses. Small businesses are usually notmajor sources for purposes ofthe major source air pollution control construction permit program (PSD program) because they tend not to have large amounts ofemissions. Since the Department is already implementing the PSD program, as required by U.S. EPA, the consistency changes being proposed in this rule will not have any additional economic impacts.


### 4The adoption ofthe PM2.5 increment will require some additional analysis during the air construction permitreview for some small businesses expanding in ce11ain pmis ofthe state, however, the Department does not anticipate thatthis additional analysis will cause noticeable delays in permit issuance times and therefore, will not result in any significant impact to the affected businesses. The portion ofthe rule that proposes to change the definition ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC) to make the rule consistent with the definition in federal regulations will provide clarity to businesses in how to calculate and report VOC emissions and on the applicability ofregulations. Small businesses affected include coating facilities, paint shops, autobody shops, and printing operations. This change is not expectedto have a negative economic impact on these businesses however, because the proposed change is specificallyto exclude some organic compounds from the definition ofVOC. In fact, the rule change could have a positive economic impact on small businesses thatuse the compounds proposed to be excluded. Many gasoline dispensing facilities are small businesses. The proposed repeal ofthe stage 2 vapor recovery program and related implementing rules will clmity applicable requirements for the affected small businesses and is not expectedto have an adverse economic impact on them. 11. Agency contact person: Kristin Hmi, Chief, Pe1mits and Stationary Source Modeling Section Phone: 608.266.6876 Fax: 608.267.0560 Email: Kristin.Hart@wisconsin.gov

SECTION 1. NR 172 is repealed.

SECTION 2. NR400.02 (162) (a) 53. to 60. are created to read: NR400.02 (162) (a) 53. Trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HF0-1234ze). 54. HCF20CF2H (HFE-134). 55. HCF20CF20CF2H (HFE-236cal2). 56. HCF20CF2CF20CF2H (HFE-338pcc13). 57. HCF20CF20CF2CF20CF2H (H-Galden 1040X or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)). 58. Trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene (SolsticeTM 1233zd(E)). 59. 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HF0-1234yf). 60. 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP; CAS number 124-68-5).

SECTION 3. NR404.05 (2) (intro.) is amended to read: NR404.05 (2) (intro.) CLASS I INCREMENTS. In any area ofthis state classified under the federal olean air act Act as a class I area, the ambient air increments ofparticulate matter measured as for PM 10,**PM .s~**  sulfur**dioxide~** and nitrogen dioxide may not exceed the following amounts:

SECTION 4. NR404.05 (2) (am) is created to read: NR404.05 (2) (am) PMu 1. Annual arithmetic mean 

### 1microgram per cubic meter 

### 52. Twenty-four hour maximum 2 micrograms per cubic meter
SECTION 5. NR 404.05 (3) (intro.) is amended to read: NR404.05 (3) (intro.) CLASS II INCREMENTS. In any area ofthis state classified underthe 

### aet Act as a class II area, the ambient air increments ofparticulate matter measured as for PM10, PM25, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide may not exceed the following amounts:

SECTION 6. NR 404.05 (3) (am) is createdto read: NR404.05 (3) (am) 

### PM2.5- I. Annual arithmetic mean 2. Twenty-four hour maximum 4 micrograms per cubic meter 9 micrograms per cubic meter
SECTION 7. NR404.05 (4) (intro.) is amended to read: NR404.05 (4) (intro.) CLASS III INCREMENTS. In any area ofthis state classified underthe

### aet Act as a class III area, the ambient air increments ofpartieulate matter measured as for PM10, PM2.5, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide may not exceed the following amounts:

SECTION 8. NR 404.05 (4) (am) is created to read: NR404.05 (4) (am) 

### PM2.5. I. Annual arithmetic mean 2. Twenty-fourhour maximum 8 micrograms per cubic meter 18 micrograms per cubic meter
SECTION 9. NR405.02 (3), (21) (a), and (21m) (a) are amended to read: NR405.02 (3) "Baseline area" means any intrastate area, and every partthereof, designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section 107 (d) (I) (D) or (E) (A) (ii) or (iii) ofthe Act (42 USC 7407 (d) (I) (D) or (E) (A) (ii) or (iii)) in whichthe major source ormajor modification establishingthe minor
source baseline date would construct or would have an air quality impact for the pollutant for whichthe baseline date is established equal to or greater than I J.tg/m3 (annual average) ofthe air eontaminant for which the minor souree baseline date is established for SOb N02, orPM10, or equal to or greater than 0.31Jg/m3 (annual average) for PM2.5 . Area redesignations under section I07 (d) (I) (D) or (E) (A) (ii) or (iii) ofthe Act (42 USC 7407 (d) (1) (A) (ii) or (iii)) cannot intersect or be smallerthan the area ofimpact ofany major stationary source or major modification which either establishes a minor source baseline date
or is subjectto this chapter. (21) (a) Any significant emissions increase from any emissions units or net emissions increase at a major stationary source that is significant for volatile organic compounds ornitrogen oxides shall be considered significant for ozone. 

### 6(21m) (a) In the case ofparticulate matter PM 10 and sulfur dioxide, January 6, 1975.

SECTION 10. NR405.02 (21m) (c) is created to read: NR405.02 (21m) (c) In the case ofPM2.5, October 20, 2010.

SECTION 11. NR405.02 (22) (b) and (22m) (a) 1. and (b) 1. are amended to read: NR405.02 (22) (b) A major source that is major for volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides shall be considered major for ozone. (22m) (a) 1. Inthe case ofpatiiculate matterPM.ill and sulfur dioxide, August 7, 1977. (b) 1. The area in which the proposed source or modification would construct is designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section 107 (d) (1) (D) or (E) (A) (ii) or (iii) ofthe Act (42 USC 7407(d)(l)(D) or (E) (A)(ii) or (iii)) for the air contaminant on the date ofits complete application under 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166.

SECTION 12. NR405.02 (22m) (a) 3. is created to read: NR405.02 (22m) (a) 3. In the case ofPM2.5, October 20, 2011.

SECTION 13. NR405.02 (27) (a) 6. is amended to read: NR405.02 (27) (a) 6. Ozone: 40 tpy ofvolatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides.

SECTION 14. NR405.07 (8) (a) 3m. is amended to read: NR405.07 (8) (a) 3m. PM2.5 

### -H Qf.Lg/m3

, 

### 24 hour**average~**
SECTION 15. NR405.07 (8) (a) 3m. (Note) is created to read: NR405.07 (8) (a) 3m. (Note) In accordance with Sierra Club v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013), no exemption is available with regard to PM2.5•
SECTION 16. NR405.07 (8) (a) 5. (Note) is amended to read: NR405.07 (8) (a) 5. (Note) No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. However, any source with a net increase of 100 tons per year or more ofvolatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides subjectto regulation under this chapter would be required to perform an ambient impact analysis, including the gathering ofambient air quality data.

SECTION 17. NR420.02 (8m), (26), (32), and (38m) are repealed.

7SECTION 18. NR420.02 (39) is amended to read: NR420.02 (39) "Vapor recovery system" or "vapor control system" meaH-S mean a system that gathers organic compound vapors released during the operation ofanytransfer, storage, orprocess equipment and processes the vapors so as to preventtheir emission into the ambient air.

SECTION 19. NR420.03 (4) (b) 3. is amended to read: NR420.03 (4) (b) 3. All gauging and sampling devices are vapor tightvaportight exceptwhen gauging or sampling is taking place.

SECTION 20. NR420.04 (1) (b) 4. and (3) (c) 1. are amended to read: NR420.04 (1) (b) 4. All loading and vapor lines are equipped with fittings which make vapor tightvaportight connections andwhich close automatically when disconnected. (3) (c) 1. vapor balance system with a vapor tightvapor tight vapor return line from the storage tank to the delivery vessel and a system that will ensure the vapor line is connected before gasoline can be transferred into the storage tank.

SECTION 21. NR420.045 is repealed.

SECTION 22. NR425.035 is repealed.

SECTION 23. NR439.06 (3) (i) is repealed.

SECTION 24. NR484.05 (4) and (5) are repealed.

SECTION 25. NR494.04 is repealed.

SECTION 26. EFFECTIVE DATE. This rule shall take effect on the first day ofthe month following publication in the Wisconsin administrative register as provided ins. 227.22 (2) (intro.), Stats.

SECTION 27. BOARD ADOPTION. This rule was approved and adopted by the State ofWisconsin Natural Resources Board on**------------~------**

8Dated at Madison, Wisconsin

---------------------------
STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OFNATURAL RESOURCES
By

__________________________ __ Cathy Stepp, Secretary (SEAL)



### 9BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Natural Resources Board OrderAM-15-14 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN Thatpursuanttoss. 227.16 and 227.17, Wis. Slats, the Departmentof NaturalResources will hold a publichearingto consider and accept commenton proposed permanent revisions to chs. NR 172, 400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, 484, and494, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to consistencywithU.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency air pollution controlregulations and therepeal of obsolete rules, onthe date and at the time and location listedbelow. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVENthatthe public hearing als\) concerns the proposed revision of Wisconsin's State ImplementationPlan (SIP) which is required under the CleanAir Actand developed under s. 285.11(6), Wis. Stats. TheDepartmentwill accept commenton the proposed submittal offinal roles affecting chs. NR400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, and 484,Wis. Adm. Code, andpromulgated under this rulemaking, totheUnited States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) for approval and incorporation into Wisconsin's SIP. Whilethe proposedrulemakingfor state purposes will affect chs. NR 172 and 494, Wis. Adm. Code, the Departmentis notproposingto include the changes to these chapters in its request to the U.S. EPAfor revision ofWisconsin's SIP atthis time. This publichearing notice and request for comments satisfiesrequirements inch. 227, Wis. Stats., for staterulernaking and40 CFRPart 51.102 for submittal offinal roles to the United StatesEPA as a revisionto Wisconsin's SIP. HearingInformation Date and Time Thursday, November5, 2015 1:00PM Location NaturalResources State Office Building 101 SouthWebster Street Madison, Wisconsin Room 713 Availability oftheProposed Rules The proposed rule revisions along with the fiscal estimate a\ld economic impact analysis may be viewed

, r I .f and downloaded athttps://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/pliblic/Rmo?nRmold=l0843

. ' "'· Accessibility Thehearing locationhas an entrance accessible to individuals with disabilities. Reasonable accommodations, including the provision ofinformational material in an alternative format, will be provided for qualified individuals with disabilities upon request. ContactRobertEckdale in writing at the DepartmentofNaturalResources, Bureau ofAirManagement (AM/7), 101 S. Webster St., Madison, WI 53703; byemailto Robert.Eckdale@wisconsin.gov; orby calling (608) 266-2856. A requestmust include specific information and bereceived atleast I0 days beforethe date ofthe scheduled hearing. SubmittingComments Comments on the proposedrules and proposed revision to Wisconsin's SIP mustbe received on or before November 12,2015. Oral statements may be presented atthehearing. Written comments may be submitted at thehearing, by U.S. mail, fax, email, or through the internet and will have the same weight and effect as oral statements presented atthe public hearing. Written comments and any questions on the proposed mles should be addressed to:

'·'·Kristin Hart Department ofNaturalResources Bureau ofAirManagement (AM/7) 101 S Webster St, Madison, WI 53703 Phone; Fax: E-mail: Internet: (608) 266-6876 (608) 267-0560 Kristin.Hart@wisconsin.gov Use the pagefor this ru1emaking onAdministrativeRules System Website to comment (requires registration to comment) at •**https://health.wisconsin.gov/admrules/public!Rmo?nRmoid~l8483.** Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Priorto the preparation ofan economic impact analysis for this proposed mle, the Departmentwidely solicited information and advice from business, business sectors, associations representingbusinesses, local governmental units, and individuals that could be affected. No information or responses were received that identified affected small businesses or gave any indication that small businesses would be directly affected. The Small Business Regulatory Coordinator may be contacted at Smal!Business@dnr.state.wi.us, or by calling (608) 266-1959. DatedatMadison, Wisconsin: September28, 2015 STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURCES

# By~-' Cathy Stepp, Sec etary 

## 4t_

### WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BUREAU OF AIRMANAGEMENT

\l 

### STATE IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN REVISION CERTIFICAT1bN

Pursuantto the requirements of40 CFR s. 51.102(f), I hereby certify that the Wisconsin Department ofNatural Resources held the hearing described below; that the hearing was held in accordance with the public notice (copy attached), as required by 40 CFR s. 51.102(d); and that I was thepresiding officer at the hearing. Subject: Revisions to SIP for proposed permanentrule revisions to chs. NR 172, 400, 404, 405, 420, 425, 439, and 484, and 494, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to consistency with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency air pollution controlregulations and the repeal of obsolete rules. Hearing held: ThursdayNovember 5, 2015 in Madison,;Wjsconsin. ' ' '·. \ \'·I 

### Written comments were received until November 1'2, 2015.

Subscribed and sworn to before me**This~** 

### day of Jao\Aa<c-1 , 

### 2016 

### '
NotaryPublic, State ofWi onsin My commission is permanent. 

# \(.QncN\1\**~** 

# _**(Y~G~** Kendra L. 

### Fisher BUREAU OF LEGAL SERVICES