E 

State of Wisconsin 

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

101 S. Webster Street 

Box 7921 

Madison WI 53707-7921 

June 6, 2012 

Ms. Susan Hedman 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, R-19J 

Chicago lL 60604-3507 

Scott Walker, Governor 

Cathy Stepp, Secretary 

Telephone 608-266-2621 

Toll Free 1-888-936-7463 

TTY Access via relay - 711 

Subject: Wisconsin's Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (liM) Program 

Dear Ms. Hedman: 

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) hereby submits a request to revise Wisconsin's State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the vehicle liM program in southeast Wisconsin. Effective in 2008, Wisconsin 

modified the vehicle liM program, as did other states, to reflect that the vast majority of vehicles would be equipped 

with on-board diagnostic systems ("OBDII") by 2012. As more vehicles have OBDII systems, the need for and 

benefits from tailpipe testing are greatly reduced. Consequently, the vehicle liM program was modified to eliminate 

the need to test non-OBDII-equipped vehicles (2007 Wis. Act 20). By eliminating the need for tailpipe testing, the 

cost of this program was greatly reduced. 

Consistent with Section 110(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the WDNR believes the revisions to the vehicle liM 

program will not interfere with attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Emission 

reduction shortfalls in ozone (03) precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides (NO.) and volatile organic compounds (VOC)) 

have been made up since the state has nonattainment areas for ozone. The state is in the process of being 

redesignated to attainment for fine particulate matter (PM2.

5) as evidenced by the U.S. EPA's recent proposed clean 

data determination for the Milwaukee-Racine nonattainment area (77 FR 24436) and WDNR's redesignation request 

submittal to the U.S. EPA on June 5, 2012. Concentrations ofPM2.

5 (i.e., design values) have continued to decrease 

in the nonattainment area since 2008. For all other NAAQS, the state is designated attainment. 

The WDNR has the legal authority under Wisconsin law to adopt and implement these requested SIP revisions. 

Section 285.11 (6), Wis. Stats., authorizes the WDNR to develop and revise the SIP for prevention, abatement, and 

control of air pollution. The WDNR conducted a public hearing on May 7, 2012. A copy of the public hearing notice 

is included as an attachment. 

In accordance with the April 6, 2011 McCabe Memo, one paper copy of the SIP revision documents is enclosed. In 

addition, an electronic copy of these documents is provided as well on an enclosed CD. If you have any questions 

regarding this submittal, please feel free to call Joseph Hoch at 608-267-7543 or Ralph Patterson at 608-267-7546. 

Sincerely, 

d~ anagement Bureau Director 

Wisconsin Department ofNatural Resources 

dnr.wi.gov 

wisconsin .gov Naturally WISCONSIN 
cc: Patrick Stevens - AD/8 

Joseph Hoch- AM/7 

Ralph Patterson - AM/7 

Page 2 

George Czerniak- U.S. EPA Region V (A-18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604 

John Mooney- U.S. EPA Region V (A-18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604 

Douglas Aburano- U.S. EPA Region V (AR-18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604 

Jacqueline Nwia- U.S. EPA Region V (AT -18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604 

Summary of Attachments: Hard Copy and Electronic 

• EPA Region V SIP Submittal Checklist 

• Public Hearing Notice 

• Vehicle JIM SIP and Appendices 
EPA Region V 

Wisconsin SIP Submittal 

Completeness Review

Submittal Letter 

1. Signed by Governor’s Designee (Bart Sponseller)? Yes X No 

2. Date of Submittal: June 6, 2012 

3. WDNR Person in charge of SIP submittal. 

Name: Ralph Patterson 

Telephone Number: (608) 267-7546 

 Fax Number: (608) 267-0560 

E-mail Address: Ralph.Patterson@wisconsin.gov 

4. WDNR Technical Person in charge of answering questions on SIP Submittal 

Name: Joseph Hoch 

Telephone: (608) 267-7543 

 Fax Number: (608) 267-0560 

E-mail Address: Joseph.Hoch@wisconsin.gov 

Incorporation Into Wisconsin Administrative Code

5. Is evidence that the State incorporated the revision into the Wisconsin Administrative Code 

supplied in this SIP package? 

 

Yes 

No X (if No, explain) 

Not applicable. This is not a rule submittal and therefore requires no incorporation into the 

Wisconsin Administrative Code. 

6. The effective date of the regulation is or was: Not applicable 

7. Are test methods/rules incorporated by reference correctly? (Has approval been obtained from the 

state Attorney General 

Yes 

No (if No, explain answer) 

 Not applicable X (if Not applicable, explain answer) 

 

This is not a rule submittal and therefore the Attorney General need not approve this submittal. 

8. Has WDNR provided evidence that it has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and 

implement the revision? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 
2

9. Did the State include a copy of the actual regulation or document for USEPA review? Provide 

additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 

10. Did the State provide evidence that it followed all of the requirements of its Administrative 

Procedures Act (ch. 227, Wis. Stats., Administrative Procedure and Review) in conducting and 

completing adoption/issuance of the revision? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable. 

11. Did the State include evidence that Public Notice was given of the revision, including date of 

publication? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 

12. Did the State provide a copy of the certification that public hearings were held in accordance with 

the information provided in the public notice (copy of notarized Class I paper proof). Provide 

additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 

13. Does the submittal contain a compilation of public comments and the State’s response? Provide 

additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

 No public comments were received. 

Technical Issues 

14. Name all the regulated pollutants affected by the revision. 

Carbon monoxide (CO) 

Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

15. Does the submittal identify the designation, status of the attainment plan and attainment date for 

the area(s)? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable. 
3

16. Does the submittal identify the location and types of affected sources? Provide additional 

explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable since this SIP submittal is not a rule. 

17. Does the submittal quantify the changes in SIP-allowable emissions and estimate or quantify the 

changes in actual emissions from affected sources? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 

 Make up emissions are quantified as part of the SIP submittal. 

18. Has the State demonstrated that the NAAQS/PSD Increment/RFP demonstration/visibility will be 

protected if the revision is approved and implemented? Provide additional explanation (if 

necessary). 

 Yes X 

 No 

19. Has the State provided modeling information to support the revision. 

Yes 

 No 

 Unnecessary X 

20. Has the State provided evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission 

reduction technology? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable. 

21. Has the State provided evidence that the revision contains emission limitations, work practice 

standards and record keeping/reporting requirements where necessary, to ensure emission levels? 

Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable. 

22. Does the submittal contain enforcement/compliance strategies including how compliance will be 

determined in practice, and at what frequency? Provide additional explanation (if necessary). 

 Yes 

 No X 

Not applicable. 
4

STATE APPROVABILITY CHECKLISTENFORCEABILITY 

USEPA USE ONLY 

SIP Package Number ___________ 

Date Received by USEPA ________________ 

Date Due_____________________________ 

State: WISCONSIN 
5

WDNR Information 

Subject Matter: Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the 

Milwaukee-Racine Nonattainment Area and the Sheboygan County Nonattainment 

Area 

Applicability 

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

What sources are being 

regulated? Clear discussion No sources are being regulated under the SIP 

submittal. This is not a rulemaking. 

What are criteria for 

exemption? Clear discussion This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Is calculation procedure 

for exemption clearly 

specified? 

Supply example calculation or 

clear explanation of how to 

determine exemption (line by 

line, etc.) 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Is emission inventory 

listed in the background 

document of the 

attainment demonstration? 

Inventory including allowable 

and actual emissions in source 

category should be included, for 

enforcement purposes and 

independent of any Clean Air 

Act requirements, in the 

attainment demonstration if 

such data is necessary for 

determining baselines in 

regulations. 

Yes. Wisconsin is submitting several 

inventories as a part of this SIP submittal. 

Emission differences resulting from the recent 

program change are quantified. In addition, 

future year emission projections are provided. 

Is the averaging time(s) 

used in the rule different 

from that of the ambient 

standard? 

The averaging time in the rule 

must be consistent with 

protecting the ambient standard 

in question. Normally, it should 

be equal to or shorter than the 

time associated with the 

standard. Longer term 

averaging is available only in 

limited instances provided that 

the ambient standard is not 

compromised. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

What are the units of 

compliance (lbs VOC per 

gallon of solids applied 

less water, grains per 

standard cubic foot?) 

Clearly stated in the rule. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 
6

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

Is bubbling or averaging 

of any type allowed? If 

yes, state criteria. Could a 

USEPA inspector 

independently determine 

if the criteria were met?? 

Does USEPA have to 

approve each case? 

Explicit description of how 

averaging, bubbling, or 

equivalency is to be determined. 

VOC equivalency must be on a 

“solids applied” basis. Any 

method must be independently 

reproducible. Provision must 

be explicit as to whether 

USEPA case-by-case approval 

is required. If provision 

intended to be “generic” then 

USEPA bubble policy must be 

met. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

If there is a redesignation, 

will this change the 

emission limitations? If 

yes, which ones and how? 

Regulation may not 

automatically allow for self 

nullification upon redesignation 

of area to attainment. New 

maintenance demonstration 

required to order to drop 

regulation. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

Compliance Dates 

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

What is the compliance 

date? 

The compliance date must not 

be later than the approved or 

about to be approved date of 

attainment unless emission 

reductions are not necessary for 

attainment. In some cases, it 

will be necessary for the 

regulation to specify dates in 

compliance schedules that are 

required to be submitted by 

source to state. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

What is the attainment 

date? Clearly defined. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

Specificity of Conduct 

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

What test method is 

required? 

Test method must be explicitly 

stated. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

What is the averaging time 

in the compliance test 

method? 

Averaging time and application 

of limit must be explicit. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Is a compliance 

calculation or evaluation 

required? (i.e., daily 

weighted average for 

Clearly defined. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 
7

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

VOC). 

If a compliance calculation 

is necessary, list the 

formula, period of 

compliance, and/or 

evaluation method. 

Formula must be explicit. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Incorporation by Reference

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

What is the state authority 

for rulemaking. Clearly stated. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

Are methods/rules 

incorporated by reference 

in the right manner? 

Clearly stated. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

Recordkeeping

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

What records are required 

to determine compliance? Clearly stated. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

This is not a rulemaking. 

In what form or units 

(lbs/gal, gr/dscf, etc.) must 

the records be kept? On 

what time basis 

(instantaneously, hourly 

daily)? 

Records to be kept must be 

consistent with units of 

compliance in the performance 

requirements, including the 

applicable time period . 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Does the rule affirmatively 

require the records be 

kept? 

There must be clearly defined 

and distinguishable from what 

constitutes a violation. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Exemptions

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

List any exemptions 

allowed. 

Must be clearly defined and 

distinguishable from what 

constitutes a violation. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Is the criteria for 

application clear? Clearly stated. This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 

Malfunction Provisions

USEPA Question USEPA Requirement State Response 

Are there any malfunction 

provisions in the rule? 

Rule must specify what 

exceedances may be excused, 

how the standard is to be 

applied, and who makes the 

determination. 

This is not applicable to this SIP submittal. 
8


201! 

• t9CMIO WNAXLP 
PROPOSED REVISION TO THE WISCONSIN STATE 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR THE VEHICLE 

INSPECTION AND MAINTAINCE (I/M) PROGRAM 

FOR THE 

MILWAUKEE-RACINE 6-COUNTY 

SUBPART-2 MODERATE NONATTAINMENT AREA 

SHEBOYGAN COUNTY 

SUBPART-2 MODERATE NONATTAINMENT AREA 

WISCONSIN 

Developed By: 

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

June 2012 
i

 TABLE OF CONTENTS 

 INTRODUCTION 1 

 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF THE WISCONSIN VEHICLE I/M PROGRAM 1 

 SUMMARY OF WISCONSIN LAW CHANGES 2 

 STATE STATUTE CHANGES 2 

 STATE ADMINISTRATIE CODE CHANGES 3 

 CLEAN AIR ACT CONSIDERATIONS 4 

 AIR QUALITY CONCENTRATIONS IN SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN 5 

 VEHICLE I/M EMISSIONS SUMMARY 8 

 EMISSIONS COMPARISON 8 

 MAKE-UP EMISSION REDUCTIONS 9 

 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS 9 

 OZONE CONCENTRATIONS SINCE 2008 9 

 CLOSED FACILITY EMISSION CREDITS 10 

 DIESEL EMISSION REDUCTIONS 12 

 CONCLUSION 12 
ii

LIST OF APPENDICIES 

APPENDIX A: Wisconsin Statutes and Administrative Code Revisions 

APPENDIX B: Summary of MOVES Modeling Inputs 

APPENDIX C: Low Enhanced I/M Performance Standard Demonstration 

APPENDIX D: Emissions Inventory Evaluation by Sonoma Technology, Inc. 
iii

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 

Table 1 – Wisconsin I/M Program Emission Reductions

Table 2 – Emission Summary (SIP I/M Program vs. Current I/M Program) 

Table 3 – Recent 4th High Daily 8-Hour Maximum Ozone Concentrations 

Table 4 – NOx and VOC Emissions from Closed Facilities 

Table 5 – I/M Emissions Make-Up Demonstration 

Table 6 – Diesel Emission Reductions 

Figure 1 – Wisconsin Nonattainment Area Ozone Trends 

Figures 2 through 13 – Wisconsin Carbon Monoxide Trends 

Figure 14 – Closed Facilities for I/M SIP Credit
1 

INTRODUCTION

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) hereby submits a supplement to its November 

15, 1992, State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision relating to various enhancements to the state’s vehicle 

inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in the southeastern Wisconsin counties subject to the I/M 

requirements under Title 1 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in 1990. The following seven 

counties are currently subject to the vehicle I/M requirements: Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, 

Sheboygan, Washington and Waukesha. Previous supplements to the initial November 15, 1992, 

submittal were transmitted on January 15, 1993, July 28, 1994, February 13, 1996, July 3, 1997, August 

6, 1998, December 30, 1998 and July 27, 2001. 

BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF THE WISCONSIN VEHICLE I/M PROGRAM

The WDNR and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) have jointly administered the 

Wisconsin Vehicle Inspection Program (WVIP), also known as the Wisconsin I/M Program, since 1984. 

It began operating as a basic program in the Milwaukee-Racine Nonattainment Area. The program 

expanded to Sheboygan County in July 1993. In December 1995, the program transitioned to the 

enhanced classification. The major enhancement involved new test procedures which more effectively 

identify high-emitting vehicles. Improving repairs and public convenience were also major focuses of the 

enhancement effort. The WDNR establishes the emission limitations and WisDOT administers the 

program. Sound interagency planning and coordination have made the Wisconsin I/M Program one of the 

country’s most successful and effective emissions testing programs. 

In March 2006, Wisconsin convened an interagency workgroup to examine the future of Wisconsin's I/M 

Program. The workgroup assessed possible program design options on the basis of emission benefits and 

cost effectiveness. One of their key conclusions was that by the year 2012, tailpipe testing would provide 

little additional emission reduction benefit. It was projected that the vast majority of the vehicle fleet 

would be on-board diagnostic (OBDII) equipped by this time. This conclusion was based on the results 

of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA's) approved mobile emissions model at the time, 

MOBILE6.2, and was relied on to support state law changes affecting the Wisconsin I/M Program. 

Wisconsin enacted the workgroup’s recommendations as 2007 Wis. Act 20. That act amended section 

285.30, Wis. Stats., to make the following primary changes to the I/M Program beginning in July, 2008: 

 Elimination of I/M program testing for non-OBDII-equipped vehicles. This change impacted 

vehicles having Model Year (MY) 1968 through 1995. These vehicles were previously subject to 

tailpipe testing. 

 Elimination of I/M program testing for gasoline vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating 

(GVWR) between 8,500 – 10,000 pounds (lbs). This change impacted vehicles having MY 1996 

through 2006. 

 Addition of I/M program testing for gasoline vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 to 14,000 pounds. 

This change impacted vehicles having MY 2007 or newer. 

 Addition of I/M program testing for diesel vehicles with a GVWR up to 14,000 lbs. This change 

impacted MY 2007 and newer. 

The purpose of adding an I/M testing requirement for heavier gasoline and diesel vehicles was to offset 

any lost emission reductions from the elimination of tailpipe testing. The I/M program changes reduced 

the cost of the Wisconsin I/M Program by $9.8 million from $13.27 million to $3.47 million annually.
2 

SUMMARY OF WISCONSIN LAW CHANGES

A copy of the updated state statutes and administrative code sections are located in Appendix A. 

STATE STATUTE CHANGES

Since the last supplemental SIP submission to the U.S. EPA transmitted on July 27, 2001, the revisions to 

Section 100.20, Wis. Stats., include the following: 

1. 2001 Wisconsin Act 16, published August 31, 2001 changed the time period of inspection 

required prior to renewal of registration. 

2. 2003 Wisconsin Act 220, published April 22, 2003 added two years to the grace period for newer 

vehicles – i.e. vehicle now first inspected in the 4th year after the model year (instead of the 2nd

year). 

3. 2005 Wisconsin Act 49, published October 27, 2005 deleted requirements that Wisconsin 

Department of Revenue audit records of the contractor annually and publish results of the audit. 

4. 2007 Wisconsin Act 20, published October 26, 2007 allowed the WisDOT to establish other 

emission testing methods and that emission testing may be performed by other authorized persons 

in addition to contractors. 

5. 2009 Wisconsin Act 228, published May 19, 2010 allowed WisDOT to contract for emission 

testing with persons engaged in the business of selling, maintaining or repairing motor vehicles or 

of selling motor vehicle replacement or repair parts. In addition, WisDOT with concurrence of 

WDNR, may grant a temporary exemption of the I/M contract. 

Since the last supplemental SIP submission to the U.S. EPA transmitted on July 27, 2001, the revisions to 

Section 285.30, Wis. Stats., include the following: 

1. 2003 Wisconsin Act 192, published April 21, 2004 exempts off-road utility vehicles from 

emission testing. 

2. 2007 Wisconsin Act 20, published October 26, 2007 changes: 

a. Oldest model year tested from 1968 to 1996. 

b. Maximum weight tested from 10,000 lbs. to 8,500 lbs. for MY 2006 and earlier and from 

10,000 lbs. to 14,000 lbs. for MY 2007 and newer. 

c. Diesel vehicles of MY 2007 and newer no longer exempt. 

3. 2007 Wisconsin Act 33, published December 3, 2007 exempts neighborhood electric vehicles 

from emissions testing. 

4. 2009 Wisconsin Act 157, published March 24, 2010 exempts lightweight utility vehicles from 

emission testing. 

5. 2009 Wisconsin Act 311, published May 26, 2010 modifies the definition of neighborhood 

electric vehicle to low-speed vehicle and exempts low-speed vehicles from emission testing. 
3 

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHANGES

Since the last ozone SIP, the “Wisconsin Phase 3 Ozone Attainment SIP”, was developed and submitted 

to the U.S. EPA Region V on December 22, 2000, the revisions to Chapter NR 485, Wis. Adm. Code, 

include the following: 

1) Clearinghouse Rule CR 05-072 effective April 1, 2006 changes: 

a) NR 485.04 Motor vehicle emission limitations; exemptions – relax oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 

emission limitations for some groups of trucks and older cars; establish new emission 

limitations for MY 2005 and newer heavy-duty vehicles; and simplify the emission 

limitations for some categories of MY 1994-1996 vehicles. 

b) NR 485.06 Tampering with air pollution-control equipment – revise the catalytic converter 

replacement provisions to make them consistent with the current federal emission warranty 

provisions in 40 CFR part 85. 

2) Clearinghouse Rule CR 10-049 effective December 1, 2010 changes: 

a) NR 485.02 Definitions – repeal the definitions for the Evaporative system integrity 

(pressure) test; Evaporative system purge test; and Steady-state tests. 

b) NR 485.04 Motor vehicle emission limitations; exemptions – repeal the emission limitations 

for the repealed tests under s. NR 485.02. 

c) NR 485.045 Repair cost limit for vehicle inspection program – inflation-adjusted repair cost 

waiver limit, currently at $800, expanded to all counties subject to the I/M program and 

vehicles with OBDII systems. 

Since the last ozone SIP, the “Wisconsin Phase 3 Ozone Attainment SIP”, was developed and submitted 

to the U.S. EPA Region V on December 22, 2000, the revisions to Chapter Trans 131, Wis. Adm. 

Code, include the following: 

1) Clearinghouse Rule CR 01-121 effective April 1, 2002 changes: 

a) Trans 131.03, Trans 131.04, Trans 131.08 and Trans 131.10 – amended to change the period 

of time prior to registration renewal in which a vehicle may be tested to 180 days from 90 

days. The other provisions were references to this change and correspond to the extended 

time period. 

2) Clearinghouse Rule CR 07-114 effective July 1, 2008 changes: 

a) Trans 131.01, Trans 131.02, Trans 131.03, Trans 131.04, Trans 131.05, Trans 131.07, Trans 

131.09, Trans 131.11, Trans 131.12, Trans 131.13, Trans 131.14 and Trans 131.16 – 

implemented 2007 Act 20 to establish the second-generation on-board diagnostic test (OBD 

II) as the only testing method and the I/M program changed: i) to eliminate emission 

inspection of vehicles MY 1995 and earlier, ii) add emission inspection of vehicles MY 2007 

and later up to 14,000 lbs. gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) while limiting vehicle MY 

2006 and earlier to 8,500 lbs. GVWR, and iii) add emission inspection of vehicles MY 2007 

and later that are powered by diesel fuel. 
4 

b) Establishes as the service delivery method a possibility of a contractor who performs the 

OBD II test at its own facilities, or by subcontracted testing at subcontractors’ facilities, or at 

self-service facilities where a vehicle owner may test the vehicle; and transmission of the test 

results and repair information to the WisDOT electronically in a format specified by the 

WisDOT. 

c) Clarifies that to obtain a waiver of compliance on the basis of statutory repair cost limit, the 

vehicle must pass a waiver emission equipment inspection. 

d) Clarifies that the WisDOT may determine whether a vehicle domicile as stated is consistent 

with the vehicle owner or lessee address or other information to deter the avoidance of the 

emission test requirement. 

3) Clearinghouse Rule CR 10-088 effective January 1, 2011 changes: 

a) Trans 131.01, Trans 131.02, Trans 131.03, Trans 131.04, Trans 131.05, Trans 131.06, Trans 

131.07, Trans 131.11, Trans 131.12, Trans 131.13, Trans 131.14 and Trans 131.15 – 

amended to allow a cost waiver even if a vehicle’s Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) is 

unable to be turned off. 

b) Clarifies and changes the term emission “test” to emission “inspection” and reserves the term 

“test” to refer to the vehicle’s internal computer check of diagnostic codes and in the 

reference to the “remote sensing test” method of assessing vehicle emissions. 

c) Expands reference to the functions of the Technical Assistance Center to clarify that those 

functions may be performed by an inspector that the WisDOT designates who may issue 

waivers of compliance. 

CLEAN AIR ACT CONSIDERATIONS

The WDNR is aware that any proposed SIP revision can not be approved by the U.S. EPA without 

appropriate consideration of CAA Section 110(l), which is as follows: 

“Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under this chapter shall be 

adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not 

approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), 

or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.” 

This section of the CAA is often referred to as the “anti-backsliding provision.” U.S. EPA Region V 

claims that the following criteria are used by the agency to demonstrate noninterference for the affected 

pollutant(s) with respect to attainment and maintenance based on draft CAA 110(l) guidance: 

1. Substitution of one measure by another with equivalent or greater emissions reductions/air quality 

benefit; or 

2. an air quality analysis showing that removing the measure will not interfere with other applicable 

requirements (i.e., without a substitute measure). 
5 

AIR QUALITY CONCENTRATIONS IN SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN

Section 182(b)(4) of the CAA requires moderate ozone nonattainment areas to have motor vehicle I/M 

programs as an emissions control strategy. Both the Milwaukee-Racine and Sheboygan County 

Nonattainment Areas are classified as moderate nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Both nonattainment areas have achieved the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS since the 2006 – 2008 time period and have continued to attain the standard. This is 

reflected in the following figure, which shows maximum design values for the two nonattainment areas in 

Wisconsin since 1998: 

Figure 1

Note: 2009 – 2011 data have not yet been fully quality assured and are considered preliminary. 

The Wisconsin I/M Program also provides carbon monoxide emission reductions, so it is important to 

consider available monitoring data and trends. The state operated an extensive carbon monoxide network 

in the past, but the WDNR has significantly scaled this network back as concentrations were well below 

the NAAQS. Currently, there is only one carbon monoxide monitor near the seven southeast Wisconsin 

I/M counties located in Dodge County, Wisconsin. The following twelve figures show trends in carbon 

monoxide concentrations, indicating that the state is far below the NAAQS. These figures have been 

taken from the U.S. EPA’s air trends website (http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/carbon.html#coloc). 
6 

Figures 2 – 7

 

 

 
7 

Figures 8 – 13

 

 

 
8 

VEHICLE I/M EMISSIONS SUMMARY

The U.S. EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) recently developed the Motor Vehicle 

Emission Simulator (i.e., MOVES). The MOVES2010 model was officially released by the U.S. EPA in 

the Federal Register on March 2, 2010 (75 FR 9411). This model is considered by the U.S. EPA as a 

state-of-the-art upgrade to modeling tools for estimating emissions from cars, trucks, motorcycles, and 

buses, based on analysis of millions of emission test results and considerable advances in the 

understanding of vehicle emissions. The WDNR has quantified emissions reductions from the current 

I/M program using the MOVES model. 

MOVES modeling projects that the current Wisconsin I/M Program will achieve the following emission 

reductions in the following seven nonattainment counties: Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, 

Sheboygan, Washington and Waukesha on a tons per summer weekday (tpswd) basis: 

Table 1 – Wisconsin I/M Program Emission Reductions

YEAR VOC NOx CO 

2009 3.47 5.59 40.38 

2012 2.31 3.97 33.37 

2015 1.76 2.66 29.68 

2018 1.46 1.85 27.72 

2022 1.27 1.35 26.50 

MOVES modeling inputs and assumptions are included in Appendix B of this proposed SIP revision. In 

addition, a modeling demonstration showing that the Wisconsin I/M Program meets the emission 

reduction requirements in 40 CFR 51.351(g), the Alternate Low Enhanced I/M Performance Standard, is 

presented in Appendix C. 

EMISSIONS COMPARISON

Based on MOVES modeling, the current Wisconsin I/M Program results in fewer emission reductions 

that would have otherwise been received from the pre-2008 SIP approved I/M program. The current 

program is based on OBDII-only testing, no gas cap testing, biennial tests and added OBDII testing for 

gasoline and diesel vehicles weighing up to 14,000 lbs. GWVR. The emission reductions of VOC, NOx

and CO are as follows on a tpswd basis: 

Table 2 – Emission Summary (SIP I/M Program vs. Current I/M Program) 

SIP I/M Program Current I/M Program Emissions Difference YEAR VOC NOx CO VOC NOx CO VOC NOx CO 

2009 4.55 6.53 49.27 3.47 5.59 40.38 1.08 0.94 8.89 

2012 3.55 4.92 43.50 2.31 3.97 33.37 1.24 0.95 10.13 

2015 2.59 3.14 35.18 1.76 2.66 29.68 0.83 0.48 5.50 

2018 1.88 2.06 29.66 1.46 1.85 27.72 0.42 0.21 1.94 

2022 1.59 1.49 27.42 1.27 1.35 26.50 0.32 0.14 0.92 

Given attainment and maintenance issues for ozone in Wisconsin, the state is required under CAA Section 

110(l) to make-up the projected lost NOx and VOC emission reductions. However, since CO levels have 

been so low in Wisconsin for the past two decades, the state is not expected to make-up the projected lost 

emission reductions because these reductions are not anticipated to result in nonattainment. Furthermore, 
9 

based on the U.S. EPA’s 2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), the seven I/M counties in southeast 

Wisconsin had 377,202.93 tons per year of CO, which equates to 1,033.43 tons per day. The 10.13 tons 

lost from the I/M program changes represents only 0.98% of the total emissions inventory in the region. 

MAKE-UP EMISSION REDUCTIONS

As previously discussed, the state is expected to make-up projected lost NOx and VOC emission 

reductions resulting from a change in the I/M program in southeast Wisconsin. The WDNR highlights 

the following items to ensure continued maintenance and attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS: 

1. The decrease in motor vehicle emissions from 2005 to 2008. 

2. Recorded ozone concentrations since the I/M program changes occurred in 2008. 

3. Make-up emissions from closed facilities in the region, including the use of NOx and VOC ratios. 

4. A reduction in diesel emissions resulting from additional diesel vehicle I/M testing. 

MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS

Federal mobile source measures over the past decade have resulted in a significant reduction in emissions, 

including reductions in NOx and VOC nationally and in Wisconsin. In the Milwaukee-Racine 

Nonattainment Area and the Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area mobile source emissions dropped 

significantly from 2005 to 2008 based on estimates from the U.S. EPA NEI and shown as follows: 

2005 2008

NOx: 34,155.67 tons (93.58 tons per day (tpd)) NOx: 22,465.13 tons (61.55 tpd) 

VOC: 21,879.78 tons (59.95 tpd) VOC: 15,557.08 tons (42.62 tpd) 

Emission Reductions Per Year

NOx: 10.68 tpd 

 VOC: 5.78 tpd 

These emission reductions are expected to continue due to fleet turnover and additional federal measures 

to address mobile source emissions. Regardless of any other state approaches described in the remainder 

of this document, these mobile source emission reductions resulting from federal measures more than 

adequately cover the projected lost I/M emission reductions. However, these emission reductions can not 

be used as make-up emissions since they have already been used for other SIP purposes and cannot be 

double counted. 

OZONE CONCENTRATIONS SINCE 2008

Implementation of Wisconsin Act 20 changes began in 2008. As a result, the WDNR has the advantage 

of using actual ozone monitored concentrations to demonstrate that the changes did not result in 

nonattainment or maintenance issues for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This is consistent with EPA’s 

draft policy regarding CAA Section 110(l) that states may demonstrate that removing a measure will not 

interfere with other applicable requirements. The following table shows the annual 4th highest 8-hour 

ozone concentrations in the state’s two nonattainment areas. Not only did the state comply with the 

federal ozone standard, which is based on a 3-year average, it met the level of the standard annually in 

both areas since 2008. 
10 

Table 3 – Recent 4th High Daily 8-Hour Maximum Ozone Concentrations 

Year Milwaukee-Racine 

Nonattainment Area 

Sheboygan County 

Nonattainment Area 

2008 0.072 ppm 0.075 ppm 

2009 0.072 ppm 0.074 ppm 

2010 0.082 ppm 0.085 ppm 

2011 0.080 ppm 0.084 ppm 

CLOSED FACILITY EMISSION CREDITS

To address the projected lost emission reductions, consistent with the CAA, the WDNR plans to take 

credit from recently closed facilities in the nonattainment area, as shown in Figure 14. 

Figure 14

The WDNR proposes to take credit for 506.47 tons of VOC per year and 72.71 tons of NOx per year 

based on maximum annual reported emissions from 2005 through 2009. Emission credits from specific 

facilities are shown in Table 4. Of these 11 facilities, all of the permits have expired and have been 

revoked or are in the process of being revoked. Furthermore, the WDNR commits that none of these 

proposed emission credits will be used for any other purpose, such as nonattainment new source review 

(NSR) permitting offsets. These emission credits are more than adequate to cover the projected I/M 

program lost emission reductions, as shown in Table 5. 
Table 4 – NOx and VOC Emissions from Closed Facilities 

Table 5 –I/M Emissions Make-Up Demonstration 
12 

The 4:1 NOx to VOC conversion ratio was based on a recently released report by Sonoma Technology, 

Inc. (STI) dated May, 2011, entitled “A Top-Down Emissions Inventory Evaluation for the Upper 

Midwest”. The 4:1 conversion ratio is seen as conservative, since a 5:1 ratio is cited in the report based 

on 2008 data. The STI report is included in Appendix D for reference. 

DIESEL EMISSION REDUCTIONS

Wisconsin’s addition of diesel vehicle testing and heavier vehicles in 2008 was intended to make-up for 

any lost emissions reductions resulting from ceasing testing of 1968 – 1995 vehicles when comparing the 

emission benefits from the original and current I/M Program in southeast Wisconsin1

. The WDNR 

believes EPA should formally recognize that the state is currently conducting this testing and grant 

additional SIP emission reduction credits. 

Based on the predecessor model to MOVES, MOBILE6.2, the WDNR estimates the addition of diesel 

vehicle testing will result in the following emission reductions in the seven Wisconsin I/M Program 

counties: 

Table 6 – Diesel Emission Reductions 

Expected Emissions Reduction (tons/year) 

2010 2012 2018 Diesel OBD Test 

Start Year NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC 

2010 0.86 0.70 1.67 1.31 4.23 3.26 

The WDNR requests that EPA work with the WDNR to develop emission credits for this portion of the 

I/M program using the MOVES model and formally credit the state for these emission reductions. 

CONCLUSION

The current vehicle I/M program in Wisconsin sufficiently meets all applicable CAA requirements. As 

such, the WDNR formally requests that the U.S. EPA review and approve this proposed SIP revision 

relating to various enhancements to the state’s Vehicle I/M Program in the southeastern Wisconsin as 

expeditiously as possible in accordance with CAA requirements. 

 

1 See 110.20(1)(b), 110.20(6)(a), 285.30(5)(d), and 341.10(8), Wis. Stats.