24378 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 80 / Thursday, April 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 5—I/M EMISSIONS MAKE-UP DEMONSTRATION—Continued 

Year 

MOVES 

emissions 

shortfall 

SIP credits from 

shutdown 

facilities 

Trading VOC 

emissions for 

NOX emissions 5

Revised SIP 

redits from shutdown facilities 

Difference 

(shortfall—Credits) 6

VOC 

(tons) 

NOX

tons) 

VOC 

(tons) 

NOX

(tons) 

VOC 

(tons) 

NOX

(tons) 

VOC 

(tons) 

NOX

(tons) 

VOC 

(tons) 

NOX

(tons) 

2022 ......................................................... 103.41 45.37 506.47 72.71 70.00 280.00 436.47 352.71 ¥333.05 ¥307.34 

5 4:1 VOC to NOX Ratio (i.e., 1 ton of VOC = 4 tons of NOX). 6 Negative numbers indicate that the emissions shortfall has been adequately covered. 

EPA also examined whether the 

amendments to the approved I/M 

program in southeast Wisconsin have 

interfered with attainment of other air 

quality standards. Southeast Wisconsin 

is designated attainment for all other 

standards including sulfur dioxide and 

nitrogen dioxide. EPA has no reason to 

believe that the amendments to the 

approved I/M program in southeast 

Wisconsin have caused or will cause the 

area to become nonattainment for any of 

these pollutants. In addition, EPA 

believes that the amendments to the 

approved I/M program in southeast 

Wisconsin will not interfere with the 

area’s ability to meet any other CAA 

requirement. 

Based on the above discussion and 

the state’s 100(l) demonstration, EPA 

believes that the changes to the 

Wisconsin I/M program would not 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of any of the NAAQS in 

both the Milwaukee-Racine and 

Sheboygan County nonattainment areas 

and would not interfere with any other 

applicable requirement of the CAA, and 

thus, are approvable under CAA section 

110(l). 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

revisions to the Wisconsin ozone SIP 

submitted on June 7, 2012, concerning 

the I/M program in southeast 

Wisconsin. EPA finds that the revisions 

meet all applicable requirements and 

will not interfere with reasonable 

further progress or attainment of any of 

the NAAQS. 

VI. 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: April 12, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2013–09536 Filed 4–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0934; FRL–9789–1] 

RIN 2060–AR52 

2013 Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Rule and Proposed 

Confidentiality Determinations for New 

or Substantially Revised Data 

Elements 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2013– 

06093, appearing on pages 19802–19877 

in the issue of Tuesday, April 2, 2013, 

make the following correction: 

§ 98.173 Calculating GHG emissions. 

[Corrected] 

On page 19854, the equation titled as 

‘‘(Eq. Q–5)’’ is corrected to read as set 

forth below: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 80 / Thursday, April 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 24379 

[FR Doc. C1–2013–06093 Filed 4–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP25AP13.000</GPH>