```

[Federal Register: April 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 80)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 22047-22063]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ap10-21]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR PARTS 52 AND 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0730; FRL-9142-2]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation 
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Wisconsin; Redesignation of 
the Manitowoc County and Door County Areas to Attainment for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Wisconsin's requests to 
redesignate the Manitowoc County and Door County, Wisconsin 
nonattainment areas, to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, 
because the requests meet the statutory requirements for redesignation 
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources (WDNR) submitted these requests on September 11, 2009.

[[Page 22048]]

    These proposed approvals involve several related actions. EPA is 
proposing to determine that the Manitowoc County and Door County areas 
have attained the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS). These determinations are based on three years of complete, 
quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for 
the 2006-2008 ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS has been attained in the areas. Complete, quality-assured air 
quality data for the 2009 ozone season have been recorded in the EPA's 
Air Quality System (AQS) and show that the areas continue to attain the 
8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also proposing to approve, as revisions 
to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plans for 
maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2020 in the areas.
    EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 base year emissions 
inventories for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas as meeting 
the base year emissions inventory requirement of the CAA. WDNR 
submitted these base year emissions inventories on June 12, 2007. 
Finally, EPA finds adequate and is proposing to approve the State's 
2012 and 2020 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0730, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: bortzer.jay@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (312) 692-2054.
    4. Mail: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand delivery: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 18th 
Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The 
Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2009-0730. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting 
comments, go to section I of this document, ``What Should I Consider as 
I Prepare My Comments for EPA?''
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://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 Kathleen D'Agostino, 
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-1767 before visiting the Region 5 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental 
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767, 
dagostino.kathleen@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:

Table of Contents

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for these actions?
    A. What is the general background information?
    B. What are the impacts of the December 22, 2006, and June 8, 
2007, United States Court of Appeals decisions regarding EPA's Phase 
1 implementation rule?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation?
V. What is the effect of these actions?
VI. What is EPA's analysis of the requests?
    A. Attainment Determinations and Redesignations
    B. Adequacy of Wisconsin's MVEBs
    C. 2005 Base Year Emissions Inventories
VII. What actions is EPA taking?
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific 
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.

II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to take several related actions. EPA is proposing 
to determine that the Manitowoc County and Door County nonattainment 
areas have attained the 1997 8-hour ozone

[[Page 22049]]

standard and that the areas have met the requirements for redesignation 
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve 
the requests from WDNR to change the legal designation of the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve, as revisions to 
the Wisconsin SIP, the State's maintenance plans (such approval being 
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The 
maintenance plans are designed to keep the Manitowoc County and Door 
County areas in attainment of the ozone NAAQS through 2020. EPA is 
proposing to approve the 2005 base year emissions inventories for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas as meeting the requirements of 
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. If EPA's determination of attainment is 
finalized, under the provisions of 40 CFR 51.918, the requirement to 
submit certain planning SIPs related to attainment (the Reasonably 
Available Control Measure (RACM) requirement of section 172(c)(1) of 
the CAA, the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and attainment 
demonstration requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and (6) of the CAA, 
and the requirement for contingency measures of section 172(c)(9) of 
the CAA) are not applicable to the area as long as it continues to 
attain the NAAQS and would cease to be applicable upon redesignation. 
In addition, as set forth in more detail below, in the context of 
redesignations, EPA has interpreted requirements related to attainment 
as not applicable for purposes of redesignation. Finally, EPA finds 
adequate and is proposing to approve the newly-established 2012 and 
2020 MVEBs for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas. The adequacy 
comment period for the MVEBs began on February 24, 2010, with EPA's 
posting of the availability of the submittal on EPA's Adequacy Web site 
(at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm). The 
adequacy comment period for these MVEBs ended on March 26, 2010. EPA 
did not receive any requests for this submittal, or adverse comments on 
this submittal during the adequacy comment period. In a letter dated 
April 7, 2010, EPA informed WDNR that we had found the 2012 and 2020 
MVEBs to be adequate for use in transportation conformity analyses. 
Please see section VI.B. of this rulemaking, ``Adequacy of Wisconsin's 
MVEBs,'' for further explanation of this process. Therefore, we find 
adequate, and are proposing to approve, the State's 2012 and 2020 MVEBs 
for transportation conformity purposes.

III. What is the background for these actions?

A. What is the general background information?

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs) react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level 
ozone. NOX and VOCs are referred to as precursors of ozone.
    The CAA establishes a process for air quality management through 
the NAAQS. Before promulgation of the 8-hour standard, the ozone NAAQS 
was based on a 1-hour standard. On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56693 and 
56852), the Manitowoc County and Door County areas were designated as 
moderate and rural transport nonattainment areas, respectively, under 
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The Manitowoc County and Door County areas were 
subsequently redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour standard on April 
17, 2003 (68 FR 18883). At the time EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 
on June 15, 2005, the Manitowoc County and Door County areas were 
designated as attainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone 
standard of 0.08 parts per million parts (ppm). On April 30, 2004 (69 
FR 23857), EPA published a final rule designating and classifying areas 
under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These designations and classifications 
became effective June 15, 2004. EPA designated as nonattainment any 
area that was violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most 
recent years of air quality data, 2001-2003.
    The CAA contains two sets of provisions, subpart 1 and subpart 2, 
that address planning and control requirements for nonattainment areas. 
(Both are found in Title I, part D, of the CAA; 42 U.S.C. 7501-7509a 
and 7511-7511f, respectively.) Subpart 1 contains general requirements 
for nonattainment areas for any pollutant, including ozone, governed by 
a NAAQS. Subpart 2 provides additional and more specific requirements 
for ozone nonattainment areas.
    Under EPA's implementation rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, 
(69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004)), an area was classified under subpart 2 
based on its 8-hour ozone design value (i.e. the three-year average 
annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentration), if it had a 1-hour design value at the time of 
designation at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in 
Table 1 of subpart 2) (69 FR 23954). All other areas were covered under 
subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design values (69 FR 23958). The 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas were designated as a subpart 1, 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area by EPA on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857, 
23947), based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003 (69 FR 
23860).
    40 CFR 50.10 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, provide that the 8-
hour ozone standard is attained when the three-year average of the 
annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration 
is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm, when rounded. The data completeness 
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient 
monitoring data is greater than 90%, and no single year has less than 
75% data completeness. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, 2.3(d).
    The WDNR submitted requests to redesignate the Manitowoc County and 
Door County areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard on 
September 11, 2009. The redesignation requests included three years of 
complete, quality-assured data for the period of 2006 through 2008, 
indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone, as promulgated in 1997, had been 
attained for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas. Complete, 
quality-assured monitoring data in AQS but not yet certified for the 
2009 ozone season show that the areas continue to attain the 8-hour 
ozone standard. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated 
to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are 
available for the Administrator to determine that the area has attained 
the standard, and the area meets the other CAA redesignation 
requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).
    On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour 
ozone standard of 0.075 ppm. In May 2008, States, environmental groups 
and industry groups filed petitions with the DC Circuit Court of 
Appeals for review of the 2008 ozone standards. In March 2009, the 
court granted EPA's request to stay the litigation so EPA could review 
the standards and determine whether they should be reconsidered. On 
September 16, 2009, we announced that we are reconsidering our 2008 
decision setting national standards for ground-level ozone. The 
designation process for that standard has been stayed. On January 19, 
2010, EPA proposed to set the level of the primary 8-hour ozone 
standard within the range of 0.060 to

[[Page 22050]]

0.070 ppm, rather than at 0.075 ppm (75 FR 2938). We expect by August 
2010 to have completed our reconsideration of the standard and also 
expect that thereafter we will proceed with designations. The actions 
addressed in today's proposed rulemaking relate only to the 1997 8-hour 
ozone standard.

B. What are the impacts of the December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, 
United States Court of Appeals decisions regarding EPA's Phase 1 
implementation rule?

1. Summary of Court Decision
    On December 22, 2006, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. 
v. EPA (South Coast), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-
hour Ozone Standard (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). 472 F.3d 882 (DC 
Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in response to several petitions for 
rehearing, the DC Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was 
vacated only with regard to those parts of the rule that had been 
successfully challenged. Id., Docket No. 04 1201. Therefore, several 
provisions of the Phase 1 Rule remain effective: provisions related to 
classifications for areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title 
I, part D, of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment areas; the 8-hour 
attainment dates; and the timing for emissions reductions needed for 
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The June 8, 2007, decision also 
left intact the court's rejection of EPA's reasons for implementing the 
8-hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu 
of subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the court let stand EPA's 
revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions 
of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged. The June 
8, 2007, decision reaffirmed the December 22, 2006, decision that EPA 
had improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour 
nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the 
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) 
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; 
(2) section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment 
areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 
182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the contingency of an area not making 
reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or 
for failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) certain transportation 
conformity requirements for certain types of Federal actions. The June 
8, 2007, decision clarified that the court's reference to conformity 
requirements was limited to requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor 
vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-
hour conformity determinations.
    This section sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the 
court's rulings on these proposed redesignation actions. For the 
reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the court's rulings 
alter any requirements relevant to these redesignation actions so as to 
preclude redesignation or prevent EPA from proposing or ultimately 
finalizing these redesignations. EPA believes that the court's December 
22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose no impediment to moving 
forward with redesignation of these areas to attainment, because even 
in light of the court's decisions, redesignation is appropriate under 
the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and longstanding 
policies regarding redesignation requests.
2. Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
    With respect to the 8-hour standard, the court's ruling rejected 
EPA's reasons for classifying areas under subpart 1 for the 8-hour 
standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency. In its January 16, 
2009, proposed rulemaking in response to the South Coast decision, EPA 
has proposed to classify Door County and Manitowoc County under subpart 
2 as moderate and marginal areas, respectively (74 FR 2936, 2944). If 
EPA finalizes this rulemaking, the requirements under subpart 2 will 
become applicable when they are due, a deadline that EPA has proposed 
to be one year after the effective date of a final rulemaking 
classifying areas as moderate or marginal (74 FR 2940-2941). Although a 
future final decision by EPA to classify these areas under subpart 2 
would trigger additional future requirements for the areas, EPA 
believes that this does not mean that redesignations cannot now go 
forward. This belief is based upon: (1) EPA's longstanding policy of 
evaluating requirements in accordance with the requirements due at the 
time the request is submitted; and, (2) consideration of the inequity 
of applying retroactively any requirements that might be applied in the 
future.
    First, at the time the redesignation requests were submitted, the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas were not classified under 
subpart 2, nor were there any subpart 2 requirements yet due for these 
areas. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) 
of the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, States requesting 
redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP 
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. See September 4, 1992, Calcagni memorandum 
(``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division). See also Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-12466 (March 7, 1995) (Redesignation 
of Detroit-Ann Arbor). See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 
2004), which upheld EPA's redesignation rulemaking applying this 
interpretation. See, e.g. also 68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 
(Redesignation of St. Louis).
    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The DC Circuit has recognized the inequity in such 
retroactive rulemaking. In Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (DC Cir. 
2002), the DC Circuit upheld a district court's ruling refusing to make 
retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the 
statutory due date. Such a determination would have resulted in the 
imposition of additional requirements on the area. The court stated: 
``Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within 
the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes 
the situation worse. Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs 
on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing 
air pollution prevention plans in 1997, even though they were not on 
notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly here it would be unfair to 
penalize the areas by applying to them, for purposes of redesignation, 
additional SIP requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect or 
yet due at the time WDNR submitted its redesignation requests.
3. Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard
    With respect to the 1-hour standard requirements, the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas were attainment areas subject to CAA 
section 175A maintenance plans under the 1-hour standard at the time 
that the 1-hour standard was revoked. Therefore, the DC Circuit's 
decisions with respect to 1-hour nonattainment anti-backsliding 
requirements do not impact redesignation requests for these types of 
areas, except to the extent that the court

[[Page 22051]]

in its June 8, 2007, decision clarified that for those areas with 1-
hour motor vehicle emissions budgets in their maintenance plans, anti-
backsliding requires that those 1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour 
conformity determinations until replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet 
this requirement, conformity determinations in such areas must comply 
with the applicable requirements of EPA's conformity regulations at 40 
CFR part 93.
    With respect to the three other anti-backsliding provisions for the 
1-hour standard that the court found were not properly retained, the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas are attainment areas subject to 
maintenance plans for the 1-hour standard, and the NSR, contingency 
measures (pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)), and fee 
provision requirements no longer apply to areas that have been 
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour standard.
    Thus, the South Coast decision in South Coast Air Quality 
Management Dist. does not preclude EPA from finalizing the 
redesignation of these areas.

IV. What are the criteria for redesignation?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) allows for 
redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the 
area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully 
approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 
110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable 
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a 
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 
175A; and, (5) the State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 on April 
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing 
redesignation requests in the following documents:
    ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,'' Memorandum 
from William G. Laxton, Director Technical Support Division, June 18, 
1990;
    ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 
Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
    ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
    ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
    ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to 
Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. 
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
    ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting 
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or 
After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993;
    ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone 
and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, 
Regions 1-10, November 30, 1993.
    ``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas 
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994; and
    ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and 
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

V. What is the effect of these actions?

    Approval of the redesignation requests would change the official 
designations of the Manitowoc County and Door County areas for the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate 
into the Wisconsin SIP plans for maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
through 2020. The maintenance plans include contingency measures as 
required under CAA section 175A to remedy future violations of the 8-
hour NAAQS. They also establish MVEBs for the Manitowoc County area of 
1.76 and 1.25 tons per day (tpd) for VOC and 3.76 and 1.86 tpd for 
NOX for the years 2012 and 2020, respectively, and MVEBs for 
the Door County area of 0.78 and 0.53 tpd for VOC and 1.55 and 0.74 tpd 
for NOX for the years 2012 and 2020, respectively.

VI. What is EPA's analysis of the request?

A. Attainment Determinations and Redesignations

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Manitowoc County and Door 
County areas have attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and that the 
areas have met all other applicable redesignation criteria under CAA 
section 107(d)(3)(E). The basis for EPA's proposed approvals of the 
redesignation requests is as follows:
1. The Areas Have Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Section 
107(d)(3)(E)(i))
    EPA is proposing to make determinations that the Manitowoc County 
and Door County areas have attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. An 
area may be considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there 
are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and 
part 50, Appendix I, based on three complete, consecutive calendar 
years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain this 
standard, the three-year average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor within an 
area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding 
convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is 
attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be 
collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and 
recorded in AQS. The monitors generally should have remained at the 
same location for the duration of the monitoring period required for 
demonstrating attainment.
    Wisconsin included in its redesignation requests ozone monitoring 
data for the 2006 to 2008 ozone seasons and has subsequently provided 
monitoring data for 2009. Monitoring data for 2006 through 2008 have 
been certified by the State; 2009 data have

[[Page 22052]]

not yet been certified. However, Wisconsin has quality-assured all of 
the ambient monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR 58.10, and has 
recorded it in the AQS database. The data meet the completeness 
criteria in 40 CFR 50, Appendix I, which require a minimum completeness 
of 75 percent annually and 90 percent over each three-year period. 
Monitoring data are presented in Table 1 below.

   Table 1--Annual 4th High Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentration and Three Year Averages of 4th High Daily
                                       Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentrations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         2006-2008    2007-2009
              Monitor                 2006 4th     2007 4th     2008 4th     2009 4th     average      average
                                     high (ppm)   high (ppm)   high (ppm)   high (ppm)     (ppm)        (ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Door 55-029-0004..................        0.079        0.092        0.069        0.075        0.080        0.078
Manitowoc 55-071-0007.............        0.078        0.085        0.064        0.078        0.075        0.075
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance 
plans, WDNR has committed to continue to operate an EPA-approved 
monitoring network in the areas. WDNR will continue to quality assure 
monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and enter all data 
into AQS in accordance with Federal guidelines. In summary, EPA 
believes that the data show that the Manitowoc County and Door County 
areas have attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
2. The Areas Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Part D; and the Areas Have Fully Approved SIPs Under Section 110(k) 
(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
    We have determined that Wisconsin has met all currently applicable 
SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Manitowoc County 
and Door County areas under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP 
requirements). We are also proposing to determine that the Wisconsin 
SIP meets all SIP requirements for these areas currently applicable for 
purposes of redesignation under part D of Title I of the CAA 
(requirements specific to subpart 1 nonattainment areas), in accordance 
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, with the exception of the 
base year emissions inventories, we have approved all applicable 
requirements of the Wisconsin SIP for purposes of redesignation, in 
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed below, in this 
action EPA is proposing to approve Wisconsin's 2005 base year emissions 
inventories as meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 
requirement for the areas.
    In proposing these determinations, we have ascertained which SIP 
requirements are applicable to the areas for purposes of redesignation, 
and have determined that there are SIP measures meeting those 
requirements and that they are, or upon final approval of the emissions 
inventories, will be fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. As 
discussed more fully below, for purposes of evaluating a redesignation 
request, SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to requirements 
that became due prior to the submission of the redesignation request.
    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni memorandum (see ``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under this interpretation, a State and the 
area it wishes to redesignate must meet the relevant CAA requirements 
that are due prior to the State's submittal of a complete redesignation 
request for the area. See also the September 17, 1993, Michael Shapiro 
memorandum and 60 FR 12459, 12465-12466 (March 7, 1995) (Redesignation 
of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan to attainment of the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to 
the State's submittal of a complete request remain applicable until a 
redesignation to attainment is approved, but are not required as a 
prerequisite to redesignation. See section 175A(c) of the CAA. Sierra 
Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 25424, 25427 
(May 12, 2003) (Redesignation of the St. Louis/East St. Louis area to 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS).
    Since EPA is proposing here to determine that the areas have 
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, under 40 CFR 51.918, if these 
determinations are finalized, the requirements to submit certain 
planning SIPs related to attainment, including attainment demonstration 
requirements (the RACM requirement of section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, the 
RFP and attainment demonstration requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and 
(c)(6) of the CAA, and the requirement for contingency measures of 
section 172(c)(9) of the CAA), would not be applicable to the areas as 
long as they continue to attain the NAAQS and would cease to apply upon 
redesignation. In addition, in the context of redesignations, EPA has 
interpreted requirements related to attainment as not applicable for 
purposes of redesignation. For example, in the General Preamble EPA 
stated that:

    [t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are directed at ensuring 
RFP and attainment by the applicable date. These requirements no 
longer apply when an area has attained the standard and is eligible 
for redesignation. Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance plans * 
* * provides specific requirements for contingency measures that 
effectively supersede the requirements of section 172(c)(9) for 
these areas. ``General Preamble for the Interpretation of Title I of 
the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' (General Preamble) 57 FR 
13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).

See also Calcagni memorandum at 6 (``The requirements for reasonable 
further progress and other measures needed for attainment will not 
apply for redesignations because they only have meaning for areas not 
attaining the standard.'').
a. The Manitowoc County and Door County Areas Have Met All Applicable 
Requirements for Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part D 
of the CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP requirements
    Section 110(a) of Title I of the CAA contains the general 
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the 
implementation plan submitted by a State must have been adopted by the 
State after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other 
things, must: Include enforceable emission limitations and other 
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the 
requirements of the CAA; provide for establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures necessary to 
monitor ambient air quality; provide for implementation of a source 
permit

[[Page 22053]]

program to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary 
source within the areas covered by the plan; include provisions for the 
implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 
and part D, NSR permit programs; include criteria for stationary source 
emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting; include 
provisions for air quality modeling; and provide for public and local 
agency participation in planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures 
to prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of 
air pollutants (NOX SIP Call \1\ and Clean Air Interstate 
Rule (CAIR) (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005)). However, the section 
110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification. EPA believes that 
the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's 
designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in 
reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal 
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a State regardless 
of the designation of any one particular area in the State. Thus, we 
believe that these requirements should not be construed to be 
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a 
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 
States to reduce emissions of NOX in order to reduce the 
transport of ozone and ozone precursors. Wisconsin was not included 
in EPA's NOX SIP Call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, we believe that the other section 110 elements described 
above that are not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and 
not linked with an area's attainment status are also not applicable 
requirements for purposes of redesignation. A State remains subject to 
these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment. We 
conclude that only the section 110 and part D requirements that are 
linked with a particular area's designation and classification are the 
relevant measures that we may consider in evaluating a redesignation 
request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on 
applicability of conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements for 
redesignation purposes, as well as with section 184 ozone transport 
requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings 
(61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); 
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 
1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio 1-
hour ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the 
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, 
October 19, 2001).
    We have reviewed Wisconsin's SIP and have concluded that it meets 
the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent 
they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has previously 
approved provisions of the Wisconsin SIP addressing section 110 
elements under the 1-hour ozone standard (40 CFR 52.2570). Further, in 
a submittal dated December 12, 2007, Wisconsin confirmed that the State 
continues to meet the section 110 requirements for the 8-hour ozone 
standard. EPA has not yet taken rulemaking action on this submittal; 
however, such approval is not necessary for redesignation.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA has determined that, if EPA finalizes the approval of the base 
year emissions inventories discussed in section VI.C. of this 
rulemaking, the Wisconsin SIP will meet the applicable SIP requirements 
for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas applicable for purposes 
of redesignation under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D, found in 
sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment 
requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part 
D, which includes section 182 of the CAA, establishes additional 
specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment 
classification.
    Since the Manitowoc County and Door County areas were not 
classified under subpart 2, of Part D at the time the redesignation 
requests were submitted, the subpart 2 requirements do not apply for 
purposes of evaluating the State's redesignation requests. The 
applicable subpart 1 requirements are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-
(9) and in section 176.

Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements

    For purposes of evaluating these redesignation requests, the 
applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Manitowoc County and 
Door County areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough 
discussion of the requirements contained in section 172 can be found in 
the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 
16, 1992).
    Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to 
provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as 
practicable and to provide for attainment of the primary NAAQS. EPA 
interprets this requirement to impose a duty on all nonattainment areas 
to consider all available control measures and to adopt and implement 
such measures as are reasonably available for implementation in each 
area as components of the area's attainment demonstration. Because 
attainment has been reached, no additional measures are needed to 
provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements are no 
longer considered to be applicable as long as the area continues to 
attain the standard until redesignation. (40 CFR 51.918).
    The RFP requirement under section 172(c)(2) is defined as progress 
that must be made toward attainment. This requirement is not relevant 
for purposes of redesignation because the Manitowoc County and Door 
County areas have monitored attainment of the ozone NAAQS. (General 
Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because 
the Manitowoc County and Door County areas have attained the ozone 
NAAQS and are no longer subject to an RFP requirement, the requirement 
to submit the section 172(c)(9) contingency measures is not applicable 
for purposes of redesignation. Id.
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. 
Wisconsin submitted 2005 base year emissions inventories on June 12, 
2007. As discussed below in section VI.C., EPA is proposing to approve 
the 2005 base year inventories as meeting the section 172(c)(3) 
emissions inventory requirement for the Manitowoc County and Door 
County areas.
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of 
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an 
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the 
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources 
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Wisconsin's current 
NSR program on December 17, 2008 (73 FR 76558 and 76560). Nonetheless, 
EPA has determined that, since PSD requirements will apply after 
redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the 
requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be

[[Page 22054]]

approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates 
maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale 
for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, 
``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting 
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Wisconsin has demonstrated that the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas will be able to maintain the 
standard without part D NSR in effect; therefore, the State need not 
have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the 
redesignation request. The State's PSD program will become effective in 
the Manitowoc County and Door County areas upon redesignation to 
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, 
March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, 
May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and 
Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures 
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. Because attainment 
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for 
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable 
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we believe the 
Wisconsin SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable 
for purposes of redesignation.

Subpart 1 Section 176 Conformity Requirements

    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and 
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities, 
including highway projects, conform to the air quality planning goals 
in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine conformity applies 
to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or 
approved under Title 23 of the U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act 
(transportation conformity) as well as to all other Federally-supported 
or funded projects (general conformity). State conformity revisions 
must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations relating to 
consultation, enforcement, and enforceability, which EPA promulgated 
pursuant to CAA requirements.
    EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP 
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) for two reasons. First, the 
requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity 
provisions of the CAA continues to apply to areas after redesignation 
to attainment since such areas would be subject to a section 175A 
maintenance plan. Second, EPA's Federal conformity rules require the 
performance of conformity analyses in the absence of Federally-approved 
State rules. Therefore, because areas are subject to the conformity 
requirements regardless of whether they are redesignated to attainment 
and, because they must implement conformity under Federal rules if 
State rules are not yet approved, EPA believes it is reasonable to view 
these requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a 
redesignation request. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), 
upholding this interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748, 62749-62750 (Dec. 
7, 1995) (Tampa, Florida).
    EPA approved Wisconsin's general and transportation conformity SIPs 
on July 29, 1996 (61 FR 39329), and August 27, 1996 (61 FR 43970), 
respectively. Section 176(c) of the CAA was amended by provisions 
contained in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEALU), which was signed into law 
on August 10, 2005 (Pub. L. 109-59). Among the changes Congress made to 
this section of the CAA were streamlined requirements for State 
conformity SIPs. Wisconsin is in the process of updating its 
transportation conformity SIP to meet these new requirements. Wisconsin 
has submitted onroad MVEBs for the Manitowoc County area of 1.76 and 
1.25 tpd VOC and 3.76 and 1.86 tpd NOX for the years 2012 
and 2020, respectively and MVEBs for the Door County area of 0.78 and 
0.53 tpd VOC and 1.55 and 0.74 tpd NOX for the years 2012 
and 2020, respectively. The areas must use the MVEBs from the 
maintenance plans in any conformity determination that is effective on 
or after the effective date of the adequacy finding and/or the 
maintenance plans' approval.
b. The Manitowoc County and Door County Areas Have Fully Approved 
Applicable SIPs under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    If EPA issues a final approval of the base year emissions 
inventories, EPA will have fully approved the Wisconsin SIP for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas under section 110(k) of the CAA 
for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may 
rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See 
page 3 of the September 4, 1992, John Calcagni memorandum; Southwestern 
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th 
Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)) plus any 
additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation 
action. See 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the passage of the 
CAA of 1970, Wisconsin has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully 
approved, provisions addressing various required SIP elements under the 
1-hour ozone standard. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve 
Wisconsin's 2005 base year emissions inventories for the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas as meeting the requirement of section 
172(c)(3) of the CAA. No Manitowoc County or Door County area SIP 
provisions are currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or 
partially approved.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable 
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and 
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    EPA finds that Wisconsin has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvement in the Manitowoc County and Door County areas is 
due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the SIPs, Federal measures, and other State-adopted 
measures.
    In making this demonstration, WDNR has calculated the change in 
emissions between 2002 and 2007. Wisconsin developed an emissions 
inventory for 2002, one of the years used to designate the areas as 
nonattainment. The State developed an attainment inventory for 2007, 
one of the years the Manitowoc County and Door County areas monitored 
attainment. The reduction in emissions and the corresponding 
improvement in air quality over this time period can be attributed to a 
number of regulatory control measures that Manitowoc and Door Counties 
and upwind areas have implemented in recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls Implemented
    The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures 
that have been implemented in the areas:

[[Page 22055]]

i. Federal Emission Control Measures
    Reductions in VOC and NOX emissions have occurred 
statewide and in upwind areas as a result of Federal emission control 
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the 
future. Federal emission control measures include the following.
    Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur 
Standards. These emission control requirements result in lower VOC and 
NOX emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including 
sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004 
and 2009. The EPA has estimated that, by the end of the phase-in 
period, the following vehicle NOX emission reductions will 
occur nationwide: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); 
light duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent); 
and, larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95 
percent). VOC emission reductions are expected to range from 12 to 18 
percent, depending on vehicle class, over the same period. Some of 
these emission reductions occurred by the 2007-2009 period used to 
demonstrate attainment, and additional emission reductions will occur 
during the maintenance period.
    Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA issued this rule in July 2000. 
This rule includes standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel 
fuel, which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 
2007 which further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 
ppm, leading to additional reductions in combustion NOX and 
VOC emissions. This rule is expected to achieve a 95 percent reduction 
in NOX emissions from diesel trucks and busses.
    Non-Road Diesel Rule. EPA issued this rule in 2004. This rule 
applies to diesel engines used in industries, such as construction, 
agriculture, and mining. It is estimated that compliance with this rule 
will cut NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 
90 percent. This rule is currently achieving emission reductions, but 
will not be fully implemented until 2010.
    Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Rules. EPA has 
promulgated numerous MACT standards, many of which limit VOC emissions. 
Compliance began for many of the MACT rules from late 2005 through 
2007.
ii. Control Measures in Upwind Areas
    NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT). Wisconsin 
adopted NOX RACT regulations for the upwind Milwaukee-Racine 
area. The emission requirements apply to stationary combustion units at 
major sources, with compliance required by May 1, 2009. The RACT rule 
is estimated to achieve reductions of over 29,000 tpy of NOX 
emissions from 2002 levels.
    NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a 
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 
States to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected States were 
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and 
Phase II beginning in 2007. The reduction in NOX emissions 
has resulted in lower concentrations of transported ozone entering the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas. Emission reductions resulting 
from regulations developed in response to the NOX SIP Call 
are permanent and enforceable.
b. Emission Reductions
    States are required to develop periodic emissions inventories every 
three years. (40 CFR part 51, subpart A). Wisconsin is using the 
periodic emissions inventory from 2002 as the nonattainment inventory. 
Point source sector emissions inventories were developed using reported 
point source emissions, EPA's Clean Air Markets database and approved 
EPA techniques for emissions calculations. Emissions were estimated by 
collecting process-level information from each facility that qualifies 
for inclusion into WDNR's point source database. Process, boiler, 
fugitive and tank emissions were typically calculated using throughput 
information multiplied by an emission factor for the process. Emission 
factor sources included mass balance, stack testing, continuous 
emissions monitors, engineering judgment and EPA's Factor Information 
Retrieval database.
    Area source emissions were generated by backcasting from the 2005 
periodic emissions inventory to minimize differences between the 
nonattainment and attainment inventories due to changes in methodology. 
The backcasting factors were based on 2002-2008 growth factors 
including the Census Bureau's County Business Pattern employment data, 
growth factors developed for the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium 
(LADCO) by E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. (Pechan); and the Economic 
Growth Analysis System (EGAS6.0). Area source emissions estimates for 
the 2005 periodic inventory were calculated using population, gasoline 
consumption, employment, crop acreages, and other activity surrogates. 
The results of an EPA Solvent Mass Balance study were used to estimate 
emissions for some categories. Emission factors were derived from local 
data, local or national surveys and EPA guidance for the development of 
emissions inventories. Point source emissions were subtracted from 
total category specific area source emissions to prevent double 
counting.
    Nonroad mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's 
National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) and emissions estimates 
developed for commercial marine vessels, aircraft, and railroads (MAR), 
three nonroad categories not included in NMIM. Before NMIM was run, the 
following modifications and additions were made to the NMIM input data: 
(1) Revised activity data for construction equipment using updates 
provided by Pechan; (2) revised allocation data for recreational marine 
equipment using updates provided by ENVIRON International Corporation 
(ENVIRON); (3) added emission factors for diesel tampers/rammers 
provided by Pechan; (4) revised population data for construction and 
recreational marine equipment using updates provided by Pechan and 
ENVIRON, respectively; (5) revised growth rates using updates provided 
by Pechan; and (6) revised gasoline parameters, including Reid Vapor 
Pressure, oxygenate content and sulfur content, using updates provided 
by the States and Pechan. Onroad mobile source emissions were 
calculated using the MOBILE6.2 emissions model.
    Wisconsin developed a 2007 attainment year inventory using the 
methodologies described above to estimate point, nonroad mobile and 
onroad mobile sector emissions. Area source emissions were generated by 
applying growth factors and applicable emission controls to the 2005 
area source sector inventory. Growth factors include the Census 
Bureau's County Business Pattern employment data, growth factors 
developed for LADCO by Pechan; and EGAS6.0.
    Using the inventories described above, Wisconsin's submittal 
documents changes in VOC and NOX emissions from 2002 to 2007 
for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas. Because Manitowoc and 
Door Counties are impacted by transport, WDNR also documented emissions 
reductions for the upwind Wisconsin areas of Sheboygan and Milwaukee-
Racine. Emissions data are shown in Tables 2 through 6 below.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 22056]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AP10.002

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

[[Page 22057]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AP10.003

    Table 4 shows that the Manitowoc County area reduced VOC emissions 
by 1.85 tpd and NOX emissions by 2.32 tpd between 2002 and 
2007. Table 5 shows that the Door County area reduced VOC emissions by 
1.23 tpd and NOX emissions by 2.17 tpd between 2002 and 
2007. In addition, as shown in Table 6, the upwind areas of Sheboygan 
and Milwaukee-Racine reduced VOC emissions by 39.90 tpd and 
NOX emissions by 125.08 tpd between 2002 and 2007. Based on 
the information summarized above, Wisconsin has adequately demonstrated 
that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable 
emissions reductions.
4. The Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 
175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    In conjunction with its requests to redesignate the Manitowoc 
County and Door County nonattainment areas to attainment status, 
Wisconsin submitted SIP revisions to provide for the maintenance of the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS in the areas through 2020.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of a 
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued 
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the 
Administrator approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after 
the redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan 
which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for 
ten years following the initial ten-year maintenance period. To address 
the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must 
contain contingency measures with a schedule for implementation as EPA 
deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone 
violations.
    The September 4, 1992, John Calcagni memorandum provides additional 
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum clarifies 
that an ozone maintenance plan should address the following items: the 
attainment VOC and NOX emissions inventories, a maintenance 
demonstration showing maintenance for the ten years of the maintenance 
period, a commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network, 
factors and procedures to be used for verification of continued 
attainment of the NAAQS, and a contingency plan to prevent or correct 
future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
    The WDNR developed emissions inventories for 2007, one of the years 
used to demonstrate monitored attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS, as 
described above. The attainment level of emissions is summarized in 
Table 3, above.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    Along with the redesignation requests, WDNR submitted revisions to 
the Wisconsin 8-hour ozone SIP to include maintenance plans for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas, as required by section 175A of 
the CAA. These demonstrations show maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 
standard through 2020 by showing that current and future emissions of 
VOC and NOX for the areas remain at or below attainment year 
emission levels. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on 
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. 
EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
    Wisconsin is using emissions inventory projections for the years 
2012 and 2020 to demonstrate maintenance. Emissions estimates were 
generated for point sources, area sources, and the MAR portion of the 
nonroad mobile sector by applying growth factors and applicable 
emission controls to the 2005 emissions inventory. The 2005 emissions 
inventory was developed following the same methodologies described for 
the 2002 inventory, in section VI.A.3.b., above. Growth factors include 
the Census Bureau's County Business Pattern employment data, growth 
factors developed for LADCO by Pechan; and EGAS6.0. Growth factors were 
only available for emission projections to 2018. Emissions for 2020 
were estimated using linear interpolation from 2018. For Electric 
Generating Unit (EGU) point sources, projections were performed on a 
facility by facility basis. The growth in generation emissions 
considers corporate utility growth in electricity demand and the 
potential dispatch by the regional Midwest Independent Transmission 
System Operator to meet broader demand. The growth in electricity 
consumption by load type is based on growth rate projections by the 
Wisconsin Public Service Commission and historic growth rates. Nonroad 
mobile emissions, excluding MAR, were calculated using NMIM with the 
modifications and additions to the input data described in section 
VI.A.3.b., above. Onroad mobile source emissions were calculated using 
the MOBILE6.2 emissions model. Emissions data are shown in Tables 7 
through 11, below.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 22058]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AP10.004

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

[[Page 22059]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AP10.005

    The emission projections show that Wisconsin does not expect 
emissions in the Manitowoc County and Door County areas to exceed the 
level of the 2007 attainment year inventory during the maintenance 
period, even without implementation of CAIR. (See also discussion 
below.) As shown in Table 9, VOC and NOX emissions in the 
Manitowoc County area are projected to decrease by 0.99 tpd and 3.88 
tpd, respectively, between 2007 and 2020. As shown in Table 10, VOC and 
NOX emissions in the Door County area are projected to 
decrease by 2.96 tpd and 1.27 tpd, respectively, between 2007 and 2020. 
In addition, as shown in Table 11, VOC and NOX emissions in 
the upwind areas of Sheboygan and Milwaukee-Racine are projected to 
decrease by 16.20 tpd and 66.63 tpd, respectively, between 2007 and 
2020.
    In addition, LADCO performed a regional modeling analysis to 
address the effect of the recent court decision vacating CAIR. This 
analysis is documented in LADCO's ``Regional Air Quality Analyses for 
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze: Final Technical Support Document 
(Supplement), September 12, 2008.'' LADCO produced a base year 
inventory for 2005 and future year inventories for 2009, 2012, and 
2018. To estimate future EGU NOX emissions without 
implementation of CAIR, LADCO projected 2007 EGU NOX 
emissions for all States in the modeling domain based on Energy 
Information Administration growth rates by State (North American 
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) region) and fuel type for the 
years 2009, 2012 and 2018. The assumed 2007-2018 growth rates were 8.8% 
for Illinois, Iowa, Missouri and Wisconsin; 13.5% for Indiana, 
Kentucky, Michigan and Ohio; and 15.1% for Minnesota. Emissions were 
adjusted by applying legally enforceable controls, e.g., consent decree 
or rule. EGU NOX emissions projections for the States of 
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin are shown below in 
Table 12. The emission projections used for the modeling analysis do 
not account for certain relevant factors such as allowance trading and 
potential changes in operation of existing control devices. The 
NOX projections indicate that, due to the NOX SIP 
Call, certain State rules, consent decrees resulting from enforcement 
cases, and ongoing implementation of a number of mobile source rules, 
EGU NOX is not expected to increase in Wisconsin, or any of 
the States in the immediate region, and overall NOX 
emissions in Wisconsin, and the nearby region are expected to decrease 
substantially between 2005 and 2020.\2\ Total NOX emissions 
projections are shown in Table 13, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ There is more uncertainty about the use of SO2 
allowances and future projections for SO2 emissions; 
thus, further review and discussion will be needed regarding the 
appropriateness of using these emission projections for future 
PM2.5 SIP approvals and redesignation requests.

[[Page 22060]]

    Table 12--EGU NOX Emissions for the States of Illinois, Indiana,
    Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin (TPD) for 2007, 2009, 2012, and 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 2007       2009       2012       2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU.........................      1,582      1,552      1,516      1,524
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Table 13--Total NOX Emissions for the States of Illinois, Indiana,
 Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin (TPD) for the years 2005, 2009, 2012, and
                                  2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 2005       2009       2012       2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total NOX...................      8,260      6,778      6,076      4,759
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given that 2007 is one of the years Wisconsin used to demonstrate 
monitored attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS, Table 12 shows that EGU 
NOX emissions will remain below attainment levels through 
2018. If the rate of emissions increase between 2012 and 2018 continues 
through 2020, EGU NOX emissions would still remain below 
attainment levels in 2020. Furthermore, as shown in Table 13, total 
NOX emissions clearly continue to decrease substantially 
throughout the maintenance period.
    Ozone modeling performed by LADCO supports the conclusion that the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas will maintain the standard 
throughout the maintenance period. Peak modeled ozone levels in the 
Manitowoc County area for 2009, 2012 and 2018 are 0.081 ppm, 0.079 ppm, 
and 0.073 ppm, respectively. Peak modeled ozone levels in the Door 
County area for 2009, 2012 and 2018 are 0.084 ppm, 0.081 ppm, and 0.076 
ppm, respectively. These projected ozone levels were modeled applying 
only legally enforceable controls; e.g., consent decrees, rules, the 
NOX SIP Call, Federal motor vehicle control programs, etc. 
Because these programs will remain in place, emission levels, and 
therefore ozone levels, would not be expected to increase significantly 
between 2018 and 2020. Given that projected emissions and modeled ozone 
levels continue to decrease substantially through 2018, it is 
reasonable to infer that a 2020 modeling run would also show levels 
well below the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    EPA has considered the relationship of the maintenance plans to the 
reductions required pursuant to CAIR. This rule was remanded to EPA, 
and the process of developing a replacement rule is ongoing. However, 
the remand of CAIR does not alter the requirements of the 
NOX SIP Call, and Wisconsin has demonstrated maintenance 
without any additional CAIR requirements (beyond those required by the 
NOX SIP Call). Therefore, EPA believes that Wisconsin's 
demonstration of maintenance under sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E) is 
valid.
    The NOX SIP Call requires States to make significant, 
specific emissions reductions. It also provided a mechanism, the 
NOX Budget Trading Program, which States could use to 
achieve those reductions. When EPA promulgated CAIR, it discontinued 
(starting in 2009) the NOX Budget Trading Program, 40 CFR 
51.121(r), but created another mechanism, the CAIR ozone season trading 
program, which States could use to meet their SIP Call obligations (70 
FR 25289-25290). EPA notes that a number of States, when submitting SIP 
revisions to require sources to participate in the CAIR ozone season 
trading program, removed the SIP provisions that required sources to 
participate in the NOX Budget Trading Program. In addition, 
because the provisions of CAIR, including the ozone season 
NOX trading program, remain in place during the remand, EPA 
is not currently administering the NOX Budget Trading 
Program. Nonetheless, all States, regardless of the current status of 
their regulations that previously required participation in the 
NOX Budget Trading Program, will remain subject to all of 
the requirements in the NOX SIP Call even if the existing 
CAIR ozone season trading program is withdrawn or altered. In addition, 
the anti-backsliding provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(f) specifically 
provide that the provisions of the NOX SIP Call, including 
the statewide NOX emission budgets, continue to apply after 
revocation of the 1-hour standard.
    All NOX SIP Call States have SIPs that currently satisfy 
their obligations under the SIP Call, the SIP Call reduction 
requirements are being met, and EPA will continue to enforce the 
requirements of the NOX SIP Call even after any response to 
the CAIR remand. For these reasons, EPA believes that regardless of the 
status of the CAIR program, the NOX SIP Call requirements 
can be relied upon in demonstrating maintenance.
d. Monitoring Network
    Wisconsin currently operates one ozone monitor in Manitowoc County 
and one ozone monitor in Door County. Wisconsin has committed to 
continue to operate and maintain an approved ozone monitoring network 
in the Manitowoc County and Door County areas. WDNR has also committed 
to consult with EPA regarding any changes in siting that may become 
necessary in the future. Wisconsin remains obligated to continue to 
quality assure monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 
enter all data into the AQS in accordance with Federal guidelines.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Continued attainment of the ozone NAAQS in the Manitowoc County and 
Door County areas depends, in part, on the State's efforts toward 
tracking indicators of continued attainment during the maintenance 
period. Wisconsin's plan for verifying continued attainment of the 8-
hour standard in the Manitowoc County and Door County areas consists of 
continued ambient ozone monitoring in accordance with the requirements 
of 40 CFR part 58. WDNR will also continue to develop and submit 
periodic emission inventories as required by the Federal Consolidated 
Emissions Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002), and will 
evaluate future VOC and NOX emissions inventories for 
increases over the 2007 emission inventory levels.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or 
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation 
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to assure that the State will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after

[[Page 22061]]

redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency 
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and 
implementation of the contingency measures, and a time limit for action 
by the State. The State should also identify specific indicators to be 
used to determine when the contingency measures need to be adopted and 
implemented. The maintenance plan must include a requirement that the 
State will implement all measures with respect to control of the 
pollutant(s) that were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the 
area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA.
    As required by section 175A of the CAA, Wisconsin has adopted 
contingency plans for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas to 
address possible future ozone air quality problems. A contingency plan 
response will be triggered whenever a three-year average fourth-high 
monitored value of 0.085 ppm or greater is monitored within the 
maintenance area. When a response is triggered, WDNR will evaluate 
existing but not fully implemented, on-the way, and, if necessary, new 
control measures to correct the violation of the standard within 18 
months. The State has confirmed EPA's interpretation that this 
commitment means that the measure will be adopted and implemented 
within 18 months of the triggering event. In addition, it is EPA's 
understanding that to acceptably address a violation of the standard, 
existing and on-the way control measures must be in excess of emissions 
reductions included in the projected maintenance inventories.
    WDNR included the following list of potential contingency measures 
in its maintenance plans:
    i. Broaden the application of the NOX RACT program by 
including a larger geographic area, and/or including sources with 
potential emissions of 50 tons per year, and/or increasing the cost-
effectiveness thresholds utilized as a basis for Wisconsin's 
NOX RACT Program;
    ii. Develop an anti-idling control program for mobile sources 
targeting diesel vehicles;
    iii. Adopt a rule reducing VOC content in architectural, industrial 
and maintenance coatings; and
    iv. Adopt a rule reducing VOC content in commercial and consumer 
products.
g. Provisions for Future Updates of the Ozone Maintenance Plan
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, WDNR commits to submit 
to the EPA updated ozone maintenance plans eight years after 
redesignation of the Manitowoc County and Door County areas to cover an 
additional ten-year period beyond the initial ten-year maintenance 
period. As required by section 175A of the CAA, Wisconsin has committed 
to retain the VOC and NOX control measures contained in the 
SIP prior to redesignation.
    EPA has concluded that the maintenance plans adequately address the 
five basic components of a maintenance plan: Attainment inventory, 
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of 
continued attainment, and a contingency plan. Thus EPA proposes to find 
that the maintenance plan SIP revisions submitted by Wisconsin for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas meet the requirements of section 
175A of the CAA.

B. Adequacy of Wisconsin's MVEBs

1. How are MVEBs developed and what are the MVEBs for the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas?
    Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIP revisions and ozone maintenance plans for ozone 
nonattainment areas and for areas seeking redesignations to attainment 
of the ozone standard. These emission control strategy SIP revisions 
(e.g., RFP and attainment demonstration SIP revisions) and ozone 
maintenance plans create MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions 
for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution 
from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs are the portions of the 
total allowable emissions that are allocated to highway and transit 
vehicle use that, together with emissions from other sources in the 
area, will provide for attainment or maintenance.
    Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking a redesignation to 
attainment is established for the last year of the maintenance plan. 
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned 
transportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the 
preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 
FR 62188).
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects that 
receive Federal funding or support, such as the construction of new 
highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the SIP. 
Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not 
cause new air quality violations, worsen existing air quality 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. If a 
transportation plan does not conform, most new transportation projects 
that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such 
transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing SIP revisions containing MVEBs, including attainment 
strategies, rate-of-progress plans, and maintenance plans, EPA must 
affirmatively approve or find that the MVEBs are ``adequate'' for use 
in determining transportation conformity before the MVEBs can be used. 
Once EPA affirmatively approves or finds the submitted MVEBs to be 
adequate for transportation conformity purposes, the MVEBs must be used 
by State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed 
transportation projects conform to the SIP as required by section 
176(c) of the CAA. EPA's substantive criteria for determining the 
adequacy of MVEBs are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    EPA's process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three 
basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) 
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a 
public comment period; and, (3) EPA taking action on the MVEB. The 
process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs is codified 
at 40 CFR 93.118.
    The maintenance plans submitted by Wisconsin for the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas contain new VOC and NOX MVEBs 
for the areas for the years 2012 and 2020. The availability of the SIP 
submission with these 2012 and 2020 MVEBs was announced for public 
comment on EPA's Adequacy Web site on February 24, 2010, at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public 
comment period on adequacy of the 2012 and 2020 MVEBs for the Manitowoc 
County and Door County areas closed on March 26, 2010. No adverse 
comments on the submittal were received during the adequacy comment 
period.
    EPA, through this rulemaking, has found adequate and is proposing 
to approve the MVEBs for use to determine transportation conformity in 
the Manitowoc County and Door County areas, because EPA has determined 
that the areas can maintain attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 
the relevant maintenance period with mobile source emissions at the 
levels of the MVEBs. WDNR has determined the 2012 MVEBs for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas to be 1.76 tpd for VOC and 3.76 
tpd for NOX, and 0.78 tpd for VOC

[[Page 22062]]

and 1.55 tpd for NOX, respectively. WDNR has determined the 
2020 MVEBs for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas to be 1.25 
tpd for VOC and 1.86 tpd for NOX, and 0.53 tpd for VOC and 
0.74 tpd for NOX, respectively. These MVEBs are consistent 
with the onroad mobile source VOC and NOX emissions 
projected by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for 2012 and 
2020, as summarized in Tables 9 and 10 above. Wisconsin has 
demonstrated that the Manitowoc County area can maintain the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS with mobile source emissions of 1.76 tpd and 1.25 tpd of 
VOC and 3.76 tpd and 1.86 tpd of NOX in 2012 and 2020, 
respectively, since emissions will remain under attainment year 
emission levels. Wisconsin has demonstrated that the Door County area 
can maintain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS with mobile source emissions of 
0.78 tpd and 0.53 tpd of VOC and 1.55 tpd and 0.74 tpd of 
NOX in 2012 and 2020, respectively, since emissions will 
remain under attainment year emission levels.

C. 2005 Base Year Emissions Inventories

    As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to 
submit a base year emissions inventory. On June 12, 2007, WDNR 
submitted a 2005 base year emissions inventory to meet this 
requirement. Emissions contained in the submittal cover the general 
source categories of point sources, area sources, on-road mobile 
sources, and non-road mobile sources. All emission summaries were 
accompanied by descriptions of emission calculation procedures and 
sources of input data.
    Point source sector emissions inventories were developed using 
reported point source emissions, EPA's Clean Air Markets database and 
approved EPA techniques for emissions calculations. Emissions were 
estimated by collecting process-level information from each facility 
that qualifies for inclusion into WDNR's point source database. 
Process, boiler, fugitive and tank emissions were typically calculated 
using throughput information multiplied by an emission factor for the 
process. Emission factor sources included mass balance, stack testing, 
continuous emissions monitors, engineering judgment and EPA's Factor 
Information Retrieval database.
    Area source emissions were calculated using population, gasoline 
consumption, employment, crop acreages, and other activity surrogates. 
The results of an EPA Solvent Mass Balance study were used to estimate 
emissions for some categories. Emission factors were derived from local 
data, local or national surveys and EPA guidance for the development of 
emissions inventories. Point source emissions were subtracted from 
total category specific area source emissions to prevent double 
counting.
    Nonroad mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's NMIM 
and emissions estimates developed for commercial marine vessels, 
aircraft, and railroads (MAR), three nonroad categories not included in 
NMIM. Before NMIM was run, the following modifications and additions 
were made to the NMIM input data: (1) Revised activity data for 
construction equipment using updates provided by Pechan; (2) revised 
allocation data for recreational marine equipment using updates 
provided by ENVIRON International Corporation (ENVIRON); (3) added 
emission factors for diesel tampers/rammers provided by Pechan; (4) 
revised population data for construction and recreational marine 
equipment using updates provided by Pechan and ENVIRON, respectively; 
(5) revised growth rates using updates provided by Pechan; and (6) 
revised gasoline parameters, including Reid Vapor Pressure, oxygenate 
content and sulfur content, using updates provided by the States and 
Pechan. Onroad mobile source emissions were calculated using the 
MOBILE6.2 emissions model.
    The 2005 summer day emissions of VOC and NOX for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas are summarized in Table 14, 
below. EPA is proposing to approve these 2005 base year inventories as 
meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AP10.006

VII. What actions is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Manitowoc County and Door 
County areas have attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is 
proposing to approve the redesignations of the Manitowoc County and 
Door County areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. After evaluating the redesignation requests submitted by 
Wisconsin, EPA believes that the requests meet the redesignation 
criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. The final 
approval of these redesignation requests would change the official 
designations for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas from 
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is 
also proposing to approve the maintenance plan SIP revisions for the 
Manitowoc County and Door County areas. EPA's proposed approvals of the 
maintenance plans is based on the State's demonstration that the plans 
meet the requirements of section 175A of the CAA, as described more 
fully above. EPA is proposing to approve WDNR's 2005 base year 
emissions inventories for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas as 
meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. Finally, EPA 
finds adequate and is proposing to approve Wisconsin's 2012 and 2020 
MVEBs for the Manitowoc County and Door County areas.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by State law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is 
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions 
of the

[[Page 22063]]

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 
52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve 
State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 
Act. Accordingly, these actions merely do not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by State law and the Clean Air Act. 
For that reason, these actions:
     Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are 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);
     Are not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Do 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

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxides, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: April 14, 2010.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010-9753 Filed 4-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```