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). Em i ssion

reduction shortfalls in ozone (0 3 ) precursors (i.e

. , nitrogen oxides (NO.) and volatile organic compounds (VOC))
have been made up since the state has nonattainment are a s for ozone. Th e state is in the process of being redesignated to attainment for fine particulate matter (PM 2

. 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 ofPM 2

. 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 enclo s ed 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 

## WISCONSINcc: 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 in corporated 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

No2

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., Admini strative 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 heari ngs 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 pub lic 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 (NO

x ) 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 impl emented? 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? Pr ovide additional explan ation (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 requirement s 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: WISCONSIN5



## 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.8201!

• 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 Pe rformance 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 4 th 

### High Daily 8-Hour Maximu m 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 rela ting to various enhancements to the state’s vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in the s outheastern Wisconsin counties subject to the I/M requirements under Title 1 of the Clean Air Act (C AA), as amended in 1990. The following seven counties are currently subject to the vehicle I/M re quirements: Kenosha, Milw aukee, 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 Transp ortation (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 Milw aukee-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 i nvolved new test procedures which more effectively identify high-emitting vehicles. Improving repairs and public c onvenience 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 eff ective 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 benef it. 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 la w 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-OBD II-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 gasolin e vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) between 8,500 – 10,000 pounds (lbs). Th is 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 vehicl es with a GVWR up to 14,000 lbs. This change impacted MY 2007 and newer.

The purpose of adding an I/M testing requirement fo r 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 administra tive 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 4 th 

### year after the model year (instead of the 2 nd


### year).

3. 2005 Wisconsin Act 49, published October 27, 2005 deleted requirements that Wisconsin Department of Revenue audit records of the cont ractor annually and publish results of the audit.

4. 2007 Wisconsin Act 20, published October 26, 2 007 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 se lling, maintaining or repairing motor vehicles or of selling motor vehicle replacement or repair pa rts. 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, 2 010 exempts lightweight utility vehicles from emission testing.

5. 2009 Wisconsin Act 311, published May 26, 20 10 modifies the definition of neighborhood electric vehicle to low-speed vehicle and ex empts low-speed vehicles from emission testing.

### 3 STATE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHANGES

Since the last ozone SIP, the “Wisconsin Phase 3 Ozone Attainment SIP”, w as 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 (NO

x 

### ) emission limitations for some groups of truc ks 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 cu rrent 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 defin itions for the Evaporative system integrity (pressure) test; Evaporative system purge test; and Steady-state tests.

b) NR 485.04 Motor vehicle emission limitations; ex emptions – repeal the emission limitations for the repealed tests under s. NR 485.02.

c) NR 485.045 Repair cost limit for vehicle inspec tion 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”, w as 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 progr am 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 wei ght 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 subcontract ed 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 ot her 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 co mputer 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 Tec hnical 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 revisi on can not be approved by the U.S. EPA without appropriate consideration of CAA S ection 110(l), which is as follows:

“ Each revision to an implementation plan subm itted 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 prog ress (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 th e “anti-backsliding provision.” U.S. EPA Region V claims that the following criteria are used by the ag ency to demonstrate noninter ference for the affected pollutant(s) with respect to attainment and maintenance based on draft CAA 110(l) guidance:

1. Substitution of one measure by anot her 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 ozon e 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 nonatta inment 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 a ttain the standard. This is reflected in the following figure, which shows maxi mum design values for the two nonattainment areas in
Wisconsin since 1998:

Figure 1

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



### The Wisconsin I/M Program also provides carbon monoxi de 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 signi ficantly scaled this network back as concentrations were well below the NAAQS. Currently, there is only one carbon monoxi de 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 Qu ality (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 estimat ing 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 ha s 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 c ounties: 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 NO

x 

### 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 Alte rnate 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 th e pre-2008 SIP approved I/M program. The current program is based on OBDII-only testing, no gas cap t esting, biennial tests and added OBDII testing for gasoline and diesel vehicles weighing up to 14,000 lbs. GWVR. The emission reductions of VOC, NO

x 

### 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 NO

x 

### CO VOC NO

x 

### CO VOC NO

x 

### 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 NO

x 

### and VOC emission reductions. Ho wever, since CO levels have been so low in Wisconsin for the p ast two decades, the state is not exp ected to make-up the projected lost
emission reductions because these reductions are not antic ipated to result in nonattainment. Furthermore,

### 9 based on the U.S. EPA’s 2008 National Emissions Inve ntory (NEI), the seven I/M counties in southeast Wisconsin had 377,202.93 tons per year of CO, whic h 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 ex pected to make-up projected lost NO

x 

### and VOC emission reductions resulting from a change in the I/M progr am in southeast Wisconsin. The WDNR highlights the following items to ensure continued maintena nce 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 th e I/M program changes occurred in 2008.

3. Make-up emissions from closed facilities in the region, including the use of NO

x 

### 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 ha ve resulted in a significant reduction in emissions, including reductions in NO

x 

### and VOC nationally and in Wisconsin. In the Milwaukee-Racine Nonattainment Area and the Sheboygan County Nona ttainment 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 du e to fleet turnover and additional federal measures to address mobile source emissions. Regardless of a ny other state approaches described in the remainder of this document, these mobile source emission re ductions resulting from federal measures more than adequately cover the projected lost I/M emission re ductions. However, these emission reductions can not be used as make-up emissions since they have alr eady 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 4 th 

### highest 8-hour
ozone concentrations in the state’s two nonattainme nt areas. Not only did the state comply with the federal ozone standard, which is based on a 3-year av erage, it met the level of the standard annually in
both areas since 2008.

### 10 Table 3 – Recent 4 th 

### 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, cons istent 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. Fu rthermore, the WDNR commits that none of these proposed emission credits will be used for any othe r 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 5.11Table 4– NOx and VOC Emissions from Closed FacilitiesTable 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 he avier 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 Wisconsin 1 

### . The WDNR believes EPA should formally recognize that the stat e 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 NO

x 

### VOC NO

x 

### VOC NO

x 

### 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 suffici ently 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 Ve hicle I/M Program in the southeastern Wisconsin as expeditiously as possible in accord ance with CAA requirements.

1 

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