[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42174-42182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-17972]



  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 136 / Wednesday, July 16, 2003 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 42174]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA258-0397A; FRL-7528-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Ozone Attainment Plan; State of 
California, San Francisco Bay Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) 
revision, the 2001 San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan (2001 
Plan), submitted by the State of California to EPA to attain the 1-hour 
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the San 
Francisco Bay Area as meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA). The plan contains the following components: Emission 
inventories, a reasonably available control measure demonstration, 
control measure commitments, an attainment assessment and its 
associated motor vehicle emissions budgets, commitments to study 
specified measures to determine if additional emissions reductions can 
be achieved, a commitment to complete a mid-course review by December 
15, 2003, and a commitment to adopt a revised plan by March 2004, to 
submit the revised plan by April 15, 2004, and to adopt additional 
measures as necessary to attain the standard by 2006.
    In 2001, EPA disapproved certain components of the 1999 ozone 
attainment plan for the Bay Area: The RACM demonstration, the 
attainment demonstration, and the motor vehicle emissions budgets. 
Because of this disapproval the Bay Area became subject to the 
imposition of the 2 to 1 offset sanction under CAA section 179(b)(2) on 
April 22, 2003. Elsewhere in this Federal Register we are making an 
interim final determination that the 2001 Plan corrects these 
deficiencies. As a result of this determination the offset sanction 
will be stayed while EPA considers whether to issue a final full 
approval. A final full approval action on these elements would 
terminate the sanctions; if EPA disapproves the attainment plan on the 
basis that one or more of the disapproved components is still 
insufficient, the offset sanction will be reapplied at that time.

DATES: Comments on the proposed actions must be received on or before 
August 15, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Ginger Vagenas, Planning Office, 
[AIR-2], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901; or to 
[email protected].
    The 2001 Plan is available on the Bay Area Air Quality Management 
District's Web site at http://www.baaqmd.gov/planning/2001sip/2001sip.htm and at their offices at 939 Ellis Street, San Francisco, 
California, 94109. A copy of this proposed rule and related information 
are available in the air programs section of EPA Region 9's Web site, 
http://www.epa.gov/region09/air. The docket for this rulemaking is 
available for inspection during normal business hours at EPA Region 9, 
Planning Office, Air Division, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying parts of 
the docket. Please call (415) 972-3964 for assistance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas (415) 972-3964, 
Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division, EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. 1998 Redesignation to Nonattainment
    B. Nonattainment Area Requirements
    C. 1999 Ozone Attainment Plan Submission and EPA Action
    D. 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan Submittal
II. Evaluation of the State's 2001 Plan Submittal
    A. Emissions Inventories
    B. Reasonably Available Control Measure Demonstration.
    C. Control Measures
    D. Attainment Assessment
    E. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for use in Transportation 
Conformity
III. Mid-Course Review and 2004 Plan
IV. Summary of Proposed Action on the 2001 Plan
V. Statutory and Executive Officer Reviews

I. Background

A. 1998 Redesignation to Nonattainment

    In 1978, the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) was originally 
designated under section 107 of the CAA, as amended in 1977, as 
nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standard. Following the 1990 
Clean Air Act Amendments, the Bay Area retained its nonattainment 
designation and was classified as ``moderate'' under section 181 of the 
CAA by operation of law. 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991). EPA redesignated 
the Bay Area to attainment in 1995 based on then current air quality 
data (60 FR 27028, May 22, 1995) and subsequently redesignated the area 
back to nonattainment on July 10, 1998 (63 FR 37258). See 40 CFR 81.305 
(1999).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As a moderate nonattainment area, the Bay Area was subject 
to the moderate area requirements of title I, part D, subpart 2 of 
the CAA that were added as part of the 1990 Amendments. In 
redesignating the Bay Area back to nonattainment, EPA looked at the 
longstanding general nonattainment provisions of subpart 1 of the 
CAA as well as the subpart 2 provisions. EPA concluded that the 
statute was ambiguous as to which subpart should apply and for a 
number of policy reasons described at length in the proposed and 
final redesignation actions, determined that the Act is best 
interpreted as placing the Bay Area under subpart 1 upon 
redesignation back to nonattainment. Thus the Bay Area was not 
classified under Section 181 upon redesignation. (See 62 FR 66578, 
December 19, 1997; 63 FR 3725, July 10, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's action in 1998 was prompted by persistent air quality 
problems in the two years following the redesignation to attainment. 
Ozone levels exceeded the federal 1-hour ozone standard on 11 days in 
1995 and 8 days in 1996. As provided under section 107(d)(3) of the 
CAA, EPA revised the Bay Area's designation on the basis of those air 
quality data. The intent of the redesignation was to return healthy air 
as quickly as possible to the Bay Area.

B. Nonattainment Area Requirements

    In an effort to focus on near-term air quality gains, EPA set an 
expedited attainment deadline of November 15, 2000 under CAA section 
172(a)(2) in its redesignation action. At that time, EPA believed the 
Bay Area could attain by that date. EPA also required the State to 
submit an attainment plan for the Bay Area by June 15, 1999 that 
addressed the section 172(c) requirements and specifically required a 
1995 baseline emissions inventory, an assessment of the emissions 
reductions needed for attainment, and adopted control measures (or 
commitments to adopt and implement control measures) sufficient to meet 
reasonable further progress (RFP) and to attain the 1-hour ozone 
standard by the attainment deadline. The plan was also required to 
provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control 
measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable. Finally, the plan was 
required to include contingency measures that would take effect should 
attainment not be achieved by November 15, 2000, and new motor vehicle 
emissions budgets capping on-road emissions of volatile organic 
compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions for 
ozone consistent with the new attainment plan. 63 FR at 37275-37276. 
See also CAA section 172(c)(1)-(3), (6)-(7) and (9).

[[Page 42175]]

C. 1999 Ozone Attainment Plan Submission and EPA Action

    On August 13, 1999, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) 
submitted the 1999 San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan (1999 
Plan) to EPA. The attainment plan was submitted as a proposed revision 
to the California SIP by CARB on behalf of the Bay Area Air Quality 
Management District (BAAQMD), the Metropolitan Transportation 
Commission (MTC), and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 
(the co-lead agencies).
    On September 20, 2001, EPA partially approved and partially 
disapproved the 1999 Plan. Specifically, EPA approved the baseline 
emissions inventory, RFP demonstration, a commitment to reduce VOC 
emissions by 11 tons per day (tpd) by adopting and implementing 
specified control measures, and contingency measures as meeting the 
requirements of the CAA applicable to the Bay Area ozone nonattainment 
area. EPA also approved the removal of transportation control measures 
(TCMs) 6, 11, 12, and 16 from the ozone portion of the California SIP. 
EPA disapproved the attainment assessment, its associated motor vehicle 
emissions budgets, and the RACM demonstration. The effective date of 
the final disapproval (October 22, 2001) started an 18-month clock for 
the imposition of sanctions pursuant to CAA section 179(a) and 40 CFR 
52.31, and a 2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a federal 
implementation plan (FIP) under CAA section 110(c)(1). The disapproval 
also activated a conformity freeze under 40 CFR 93.120(a)(2). 62 FR 
43796 (August 15, 1997).
    EPA's September 20, 2001 notice also included a finding that the 
Bay Area failed to attain the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone by its November 
15, 2000 attainment deadline. In response to the finding of failure to 
attain, the EPA required the State to submit a SIP revision for the Bay 
Area to EPA by September 20, 2002 that meets the requirements of CAA 
sections 110 and 172 and provides for attainment ``as expeditiously as 
practicable'' but no later than September 20, 2006. CAA section 179(d).
    For details about EPA's evaluation of the 1999 Plan elements and 
failure to attain finding, please see the proposed rulemaking at 66 FR 
17379 (March 30, 2001) and final rulemaking at 66 FR 48340 (September 
20, 2001).

D. 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan Submittal

    On November 30, 2001, CARB submitted the 2001 Plan to EPA. The 
attainment plan was submitted as a proposed revision to the California 
SIP by CARB on behalf of the co-lead agencies. The 2001 Plan includes 
the following elements:
    [sbull] Emissions inventories for 1995 and 2000 and projected 
inventories for 2001-2006.
    [sbull] Reasonably available control measure demonstration.
    [sbull] Commitments to adopt new, specified control measures.
    [sbull] Attainment assessment, including a commitment to develop 
additional control measures as needed to attain the standard by 2006.
    [sbull] Motor vehicle emissions budgets for the attainment year.
    [sbull] Commitments by CARB and the co-lead agencies to: (1) Study 
specified measures to determine whether significant additional emission 
reductions can be achieved and whether implementation is feasible; (2) 
conduct a mid-course review by December 15, 2003 that will include an 
evaluation of the modeling from the Central California Ozone Study 
(CCOS) \2\ and the latest technical information (inventory data, 
monitoring, etc.) to determine the level of emission reductions needed 
to attain the 1-hour ozone standard; (3) adopt a SIP revision by March 
2004 that includes a revised attainment target and new control measures 
as needed to attain by 2006; and (4) submit the revision to EPA by 
April 15, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Central California Ozone Study is a large field 
measurement program conducted during the summer of 2000 to provide a 
more comprehensive and liable data base for future ozone analyses. 
Information regarding the CCOS is available on-line at http://www.arb.ca.gov/airways/ccos/ccos.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 14, 2002 we found the motor vehicle emissions budgets 
adequate for transportation conformity purposes.\3\ The plan became 
complete by operation of law on April 30, 2002. CAA section 
110(k)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter, Jack Broadbent, EPA Region 9 to Michael Kenney, 
California Air Resources Board (ARB), dated February 14, 2001. A 
copy of this letter can be found in the docket. We published this 
finding in the Federal Register on February 21, 2002. (See 67 FR 
8017.) Our adequacy determination was effective on March 8, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Evaluation of the State's Submittal

    EPA evaluated the 2001 Plan according to the general nonattainment 
plan requirements contained in section 172(c) of the CAA. For a more 
complete discussion of section 172(c) as it applies to the Bay Area 
ozone plan, please refer to the proposed redesignation, 62 FR 66580.

A. Emissions Inventories

    CAA section 172(c)(3) requires nonattainment plans to include a 
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions from 
all sources. The purpose of this inventory is to provide a benchmark 
for attainment planning, and it is often referred to as a baseline 
inventory. To satisfy this requirement, the State submitted 1995 and 
2000 emissions inventories and projected emissions inventories for 
2001-2006 for VOC and NOX (2001 Plan, Table 4). They are 
seasonal inventories (typical summer day) representing emissions when 
ozone levels are at their highest.
    The inventories are divided into stationary sources (point, area, 
and biogenic) and on-road motor vehicle and non-road mobile sources. 
Stationary source emissions were determined using reported emissions 
estimates derived from engineering calculations using emission factors 
from local or outside test data. Emission computation methodology by 
source categories is set forth in the BAAQMD publication ``Source 
Category Methodologies.'' For on-road motor vehicles, EMFAC 2000 was 
used to develop the inventories. The inventories also take rule 
effectiveness into account and were based on the best data available at 
the time. Because the emissions inventories are comprehensive and 
current and accurately incorporate the best data available at the time, 
EPA proposes to approve them as meeting the requirements of section 
172(c)(3).
    In the course of studying certain measures (identified as further 
study measures in the 2001 Plan) to identify additional sources of VOC 
reductions, the BAAQMD has prepared draft documents that show that 
emissions from certain sources in the 2001 Plan inventories may be 
underestimated.\4\ Should these findings be confirmed, the emissions 
inventories that will be submitted with the revised ozone plan in 2004 
must incorporate the corrected emissions levels. In addition, the co-
lead agencies must use the most recent model developed by CARB and 
accepted by EPA to determine emissions from motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The BAAQMD has prepared draft technical assessment documents 
(TADs) that describe its findings with respect to further study 
measures 8, 9, and 11. The TADs can be viewed on-line at http://www.baaqmd.gov/enf/refineryfsm/REFINERY_WEBSITE.htm. The further 
study measures are discussed in Section 5 of the 2001 Plan and are 
listed in Table 1 below.

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

[[Page 42176]]

B. Reasonably Available Control Measure Demonstration

    CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires nonattainment area plans to provide 
for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as practicable. 
EPA's principal guidance interpreting the Act's RACM requirement is 
found in the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 at 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 
1992). We interpret section 172(c)(1) to impose a duty on states to 
consider all available control measures (including those identified in 
public comments) and to adopt and implement such measures that are 
reasonably available for implementation in the particular nonattainment 
area. Under this interpretation, a state does not need to adopt 
measures that are technologically or economically infeasible for the 
area or would not contribute to expeditious attainment of the 
applicable standard in the area, that is, would not advance the 
attainment date by at least one year.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In 1999, EPA reaffirmed its position on this topic in the 
memorandum, ``Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures 
(RACM) Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for 
Ozone Nonattainment Areas,'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, dated November 30, 1999. In this 
memorandum, we state that in order to determine whether a state has 
adopted all RACM necessary for attainment and as expeditiously as 
practicable, the state will need to provide a justification as to 
why measures within the arena of potential reasonable measures have 
not been adopted. The justification would need to support that a 
measure was not reasonably available for that area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our action on the Bay Area's 1999 Plan (66 FR 48341), we 
disapproved the RACM demonstration, noting that the 1999 Plan was 
silent on the RACM requirement and did not address all measures 
suggested by the public. The staff report prepared for the 1999 Plan 
(dated June 9, 1999) mentions just four measures suggested by the 
public and lacks an analysis of other potentially available measures.
    In contrast, the 2001 Plan includes an extensive analysis that 
addresses more than 125 potential stationary source, area source, 
mobile source, and transportation control measures. See 2001 Plan, 
Appendix C. This analysis covers a broad range of potential RACM such 
as controls in the California Clean Air Plan, controls in place in the 
South Coast, TCMs listed in CAA section 108(f), smart growth measures, 
and transportation pricing measures. It also covers the measures 
suggested in public comments on the plan. When viewed in combination 
with the area's existing measures and strategies and those newly 
adopted for the plan, the RACM analysis covers the range of potential 
measures for the area's non-trivial sources of emissions.
    A number of people commented during the co-lead agencies' public 
process that the 2001 Plan did not address or incorrectly characterized 
transportation control measures that were suggested by the public at 
the time the 2001 Plan was being developed. We found no persuasive 
evidence \6\ that the plan excludes significant unique measures (as 
opposed to variations of those that were evaluated) that are reasonable 
and would likely result in more expeditious attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For example, the general nature of some comments precluded 
detailed analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For each identified potential RACM, the plan generally evaluates 
its technological and economic feasibility as well as (qualitatively or 
quantitatively) its potential to reduce emissions in the Bay Area prior 
to the attainment date. For each measure evaluated, the 2001 Plan 
provides for the adoption of the measure or a reasonable and adequately 
supported justification for not including the measure in the plan.
    The 2001 Plan identifies 13 new measures to be implemented and a 
schedule for adoption and implementation. See 2001 Plan, Appendix B, 
and the discussion under section II.C. below. The 2001 Plan also 
includes a list of 11 measures that are not currently reasonably 
available but may become so in the future. The 2001 Plan includes a 
commitment to study those measures and dates for the completion of the 
studies. (See 2001 Plan, Table 9 and Appendix E and Table 1, below.) 
EPA is proposing to approve this commitment under section 110(k)(3) of 
the CAA as strengthening the SIP. EPA agrees that establishing such 
further study measures is an appropriate way to move forward on 
measures that are not currently RACM, but do appear to hold some 
promise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ With the exception of FS-10, all measures with completion 
dates that have passed have been completed. A workgroup has been 
convened for FS-10 and a technical assessment is underway. See the 
co-lead agencies' April 10, 2003 progress report, which is in the 
docket and available on line at http://www.baaqmd.gov/planning/2001sip/rfpreportfinal.pdf. MTC's report on further study measures 
1-5 is available online at http://www.mtc.ca.gov/whats_happening/AirQuality/FSM.pdf.
    \8\ For commitments in the plan that do not identify the day of 
the month, as here, or the month, as in Table 2, EPA interprets the 
deadline to be no later than the last day of the month or December 
31st of the noted year, respectively.

                    Table 1.--Further Study Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2001 SIP                      Measure                 completion \7\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FS-1.............  Study Potential for              April 2002.\8\
                    Accelerating Particulate Trap
                    Retrofit Program for Urban
                    Buses.
FS-2.............  Update MTC High-Occupancy        December 2002.
                    Vehicle Lane Master Plan.
FS-3.............  Study Air Quality Effects of     April 2003.
                    High-Speed Freeway Travel.
FS-4.............  Evaluate Parking Management      July 2003.
                    Incentive Program.
FS-5.............  Enhanced Housing Incentive       December 2003.
                    Program.
FS-6.............  Further Smog Check Program       December 2003.
                    Improvements.
FS-7.............  Parking Cash-Out Pilot Program.  December 2003.
FS-8.............  Refinery Pressure Vessels,       December 2003.
                    Blowdown Systems, and Flares.
FS-9.............  Refinery Wastewater Systems....  December 2003.
FS-10............  Organic Liquid Storage Tanks...  December 2002.
FS-11............  Marine Tank Vessel Activities..  December 2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 42177]]

    Based on our evaluation, we conclude that the 2001 Plan presents an 
adequate RACM demonstration, and are therefore proposing to approve 
it.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Of course, what is ``reasonably available'' changes over 
time. Measures that were not considered to be RACM in 2001 could 
potentially become RACM by 2004, when the Bay Area's new ozone 
attainment plan is due. For example, the further study measures that 
have been undertaken to examine refinery emissions and marine 
loading operations could yield information that demonstrates 
additional emissions reductions from these sectors are reasonably 
available. We expect that the Bay Area's next plan will include an 
updated analysis that, among other things, revisits measures that 
were previously determined to not be RACM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Control Measures

    In order to attain the ozone standard by 2006, the Bay Area must 
reduce VOC emissions by 148 tons per day from 554 tons per day (2000 
VOC emissions) to 406 tons per day. NOX will be reduced by 
123 tons per day, from 647 tons per day (2000 NOX emissions) 
to 524 tons per day. To provide for attainment by the applicable date, 
the 2001 Plan relies on reductions from previously adopted measures and 
enforceable commitments to adopt 13 new stationary, area, mobile 
source, and transportation control measures that will provide 
additional reductions. The new measures and their expected emissions 
reductions are listed in the tables below and are described in Appendix 
B of the 2001 Plan. The Plan also includes an enforceable commitment to 
adopt additional measures needed for attainment. Section II.D. below 
discusses EPA's authority to approve commitments and our rationale for 
approving the commitments in the 2001 Plan.
    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve as part of the 
attainment assessment (discussed below) required by CAA section 
172(c)(1) the adoption and implementation dates of the new measures and 
the total emissions reductions they are cumulatively projected to 
achieve. We are approving all dates, including those that have passed, 
in order to make the commitments enforceable by EPA and citizens under 
the CAA.

                                             Table 2.--New Stationary and Area Source Control Measures \10\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                 Estimated    Estimated
                                                                                                                                    VOC          NOx
       2001 SIP No.           BAAQMD Regulation No.                 Source category               Adoption     Implementation    reduction    reduction
                                                                                                    date            date        (tpd), 2000  (tpd), 2000
                                                                                                                                  to 2006      to 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measures to be adopted by the BAAQMD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SS-11....................  8-3........................  Improved Architectural Coatings Rule..         2001          2003-2004          2.9  ...........
SS-12....................  8-5........................  Improved Storage of Organic Liquids            2002               2002          1.9  ...........
                                                         Rule.
SS-13....................  8-14 and 8-19..............  Surface Preparation and Cleanup                2002               2003          0.3  ...........
                                                         Standards for Metal Parts Coating.
SS-14....................  8-16.......................  Aqueous Solvents......................         2002               2003          3.0  ...........
SS-15....................  TBD........................  Petroleum Refinery Flare Monitoring...         2003               2004     \11\ TBD  ...........
SS-16....................  8-18.......................  Low-Emission Refinery Valves..........         2003               2004          TBD  ...........
SS-17....................  8-10.......................  Improved Process Vessel                        2003               2004          0.1  ...........
                                                         Depressurization Rule.
                                                                                                                               --------------
                                                                                                ...........              Total          8.2         0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Adopted regulations will be submitted to EPA within six months of adoption. See 2001 Plan, page 31.
\11\ At the time of plan adoption, the BAAQMD was not able to determine the amount of emissions reductions that could be achieved by adoption of rules
  implementing SS-15 and 16. The District indicated that the reductions were to be determined (TBD). Therefore, the emission reduction total for SS-11
  through SS-17 does not include reductions from these two measures.


                                                       Table 3.--New Mobile Source Control Measure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                           Estimated VOC   Estimated NOx
                                                                                            Request      Implementation      reduction       reduction
          2001 SIP No.                               Source category                       \12\  date         date        (tpd), 2000 to  (tpd), 2000 to
                                                                                                                               2006            2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measures to be requested by the BAAQMD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MS-1...........................  Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program--              2002          2002-2003             4.0  ..............
                                  Liquid Leak Inspection and Improved Evaporative System
                                  Test.
                                                                                          ...........              Total             4.0            0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ California Health & Safety Code (H&SC) 44003 gives California Air Pollution Control Districts the authority to request that the Department of
  Consumer Affairs (DCA) implement all or parts of the motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program in their areas. In the 2001 Plan, the BAAQMD,
  which was subject only to the basic smog check program, committed to opting into the Liquid Leak Inspection and Improved Evaporative System Test
  elements of enhanced smog check. DCA is already implementing the liquid leak inspection component within the Bay Area. DCA expects implementation of
  the full enhanced I/M program to begin in October 2003, yielding greater emissions reductions than the MS-1 commitment. Moreover, State law was
  amended in 2002 (AB 2637--Cardoza) to mandate expeditious DCA implementation of full enhanced inspection and maintenance in the Bay Area, which
  delivers substantially greater emissions reductions than the commitments in the 2001 Plan.


[[Page 42178]]


                                  Table 4.--New Transportation Control Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Estimated NOX
                   Control measure     Description and                         Estimated VOC        reduction
  2001 SIP No.       description    implementation steps      Schedule       reduction (tpd),     (tpd), 2000 to
                                                                               2000 to 2006            2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCM A...........  Regional 1        Program includes      FY 2003.         See Below...........  See Below.
                   Express Bus       purchase of           Complete once
                   Program.          approximately 90      $40 million in
                                     low emission buses    funding
                                     to operate new or     pursuant to
                                     enhanced express      Government
                                     bus services. Buses   Code Section
                                     will meet all         14556.40 is
                                     applicable CARB       approved by
                                     standards, and will   the California
                                     include particulate   Transportation
                                     traps or filters.     Commission and
                                     MTC will approve      obligated by
                                     $40 million in        bus operators.
                                     funding to various
                                     transit operators
                                     for bus
                                     acquisition.
                                     Program assumes
                                     transit operators
                                     can sustain service
                                     for a five year
                                     period. Actual
                                     emission reductions
                                     will be determined
                                     based on routes
                                     selected by MTC.
TCM B...........  Bicycle/          Fund high priority    FY 2004--2006.   See Below...........  See Below.
                   Pedestrian        projects in           Complete once
                   Program.          countrywide plans     $15 million in
                                     consistent with TDA   TDA Article 3
                                     funding               is allocated
                                     availability. MTC     by MTC.
                                     would fund only
                                     projects that are
                                     exempt from CEQA,
                                     have no significant
                                     environmental
                                     impacts, or
                                     adequately mitigate
                                     any adverse
                                     environmental
                                     impacts. Actual
                                     emission reductions
                                     will be determined
                                     based on the
                                     projects funded.
TCM C...........  Transportation    Program provides      FY 2004--2006.   See Below...........  See Below.
                   for Livable       planning grants,      Complete once
                   Communities       technical             $27 million in
                   (TLC).            assistance, and       TLC grant
                                     capital grants to     funding is
                                     help cities and       approved by
                                     nonprofit agencies    MTC.
                                     link transportation
                                     projects with
                                     community plans.
                                     MTC would fund only
                                     projects that are
                                     exempt from CEQA,
                                     have no significant
                                     environmental
                                     impacts, or
                                     adequately mitigate
                                     any adverse
                                     environmental
                                     impacts. Actual
                                     emission reductions
                                     will be determined
                                     based on the
                                     projects funded.
TCM 4...........  Additional        Operation of 55 lane  FY 2001.         See Below...........  See Below.
                   Freeway Service   miles of new roving   Complete by
                   Patrol.           tow truck patrols     maintaining
                                     beyond routes which   increase in
                                     existed in 2000.      FSP mileage
                                     TCM commitment        through
                                     would be satisfied    December 2006.
                                     by any combination
                                     for routes adding
                                     55 miles. Tow
                                     trucks used in
                                     service are new
                                     vehicles meeting
                                     all applicable CARB
                                     standards.
TCM 5...........  Transit Access    Take credit for       BART--SFO        See Below...........  See Below.
                   to Airports.      emission reductions   service to
                                     from air passengers   start in FY
                                     who use BART to       2003. Complete
                                     SFO, as these         by maintaining
                                     reductions are not    service
                                     included in the       through 2006.
                                     Baseline.
                                                                          -----------------------
      Total.....  ................  ....................  ...............  0.5.................  0.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Attainment Assessment

    Under section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, nonattainment areas are 
required to submit plans that provide for attainment of the national 
ambient air quality standards. As stated above, the 2001 Plan is 
required to provide for attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard ``as 
expeditiously as practicable'' but no later than September 20, 2006. To 
provide for expeditious attainment, the 2001 Plan relies on fully 
adopted regulations, enforceable commitments to adopt new, identified 
measures (section II.B. above) and, as discussed below, an enforceable 
commitment to adopt measures to achieve an additional 26 tpd of VOC 
emission reductions. To support the attainment assessment, the Plan 
includes additional enforceable commitments, also discussed below, to 
submit a SIP revision in 2004.
    The 2001 Plan contains a simplified modeling analysis, with an 
explanation and documentation of the modeling approach (2001 Plan, pp. 
14-22), using the relevant available data, which is sparse in the 
period before the CCOS field study can be employed in a more 
sophisticated Urban Airshed Modeling (UAM) analysis.\13\ The limitation 
of the existing modeling assessment are acknowledged in the plan, and 
are the

[[Page 42179]]

direct result of the shortage of key input data spending completion of 
the new model. The 2001 Plan employes several different methods, 
including precursor emission and concentration trends, rollback, and 
isopleth analyses, to calculate the emissions reductions necessary for 
attainment. The attainment target is conservatively based on the 2000 
ozone isopleth analysis, which generates the largest amount of 
emissions reductions required for attainment of the various methods 
employed, and thereby reduces the potential for underestimation of 
reduction requirements (2001 Plan, p. 22). Given the limitations in the 
data and considering the conservative approach taken in setting the 
attainment target, EPA believes that the modeling approach employed in 
the 2001 Plan reasonably approximates the attainment target.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ EPA modeling guidance provides that states may rely on a 
modeled attainnent demonstration supplemented with additional 
evidence to demonstrate attainment. The modeling analysis for the 
Bay Area is governed by 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W (6.0 Models of 
Ozone, Carbon Monoxide and Nitrogen Dioxide): A control agency with 
jurisdiction over areas with significant ozone problems and which 
has sufficient resources and data to use a photochemical dispersion 
model is encouraged to do so. However, empirical models fill the gap 
between more sophisticated photochemical dispersion models and may 
be the only applicable procedure if the available data bases are 
insufficient for refined modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the 2001 Plan's modeling analysis, reductions from the 
previously adopted and new measures are still not sufficient to attain 
the 1-hour ozone standard. The estimated shortfall is approximately 26 
tons per day (tpd) of VOC reductions. The co-lead agencies indicated 
that adopting measures to fill the 26 tpd shortfall would require 
further study. Thus, the co-lead agencies and CARB made an enforceable 
commitment as part of their 2001 Plan to adopt and submit measures to 
fill this shortfall (2001 Plan, pages 22, 24, and 34). The State has 
also made enforceable commitments to submit a SIP revision by April 15, 
2004 using the CCOS to reassess attainment needs, and to adopt any 
additional measures needed to provide for attainment by the 2006 
deadline. The CCOS currently under way will provide the data necessary 
for a more detailed modeling analysis and is expected to be available 
for the co-lead agencies to use in their mid-course review.
    EPA believes--consistent with past practice--that the CAA allows 
approval of enforceable commitments that are limited in scope where 
circumstances exist that warrant the use of such commitments in place 
of adopted measures.\14\ \15\ once EPA determines that circumstances 
warrant consideration of an enforceable commitment, EPA believes that 
three factors should be considered in determining whether to approve 
the enforceable commitment: (1) Whether the commitment addresses a 
limited portion of the statutorily-required program; (2) whether the 
state is capable of fulfilling its commitment; and (3) whether the 
commitment is for a reasonable and appropriate period of time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Commitment approved by EPA under section 110(k)(3) of the 
CAA are enforceable by the EPA and citizens under, respectively, 
sections 113 and 304 of the CAA. In the past, EPA has approved 
enforceable commitments and courts have enforced these actions 
against states that failed to comply with those commitments: See, 
e.g., American Lung Ass'n of N.J. v. Kean, 670 F. Supp. 1285 (D.N.J. 
1987), aff'd, 871 F.2d 319 (3rd Cir. 1989); NRDC, Inc. v. N.Y. State 
Dept. of Env. Cons., 668 F. Supp. 848 (S.D.N.Y. 1987); Citizens for 
a Better Env't v. Deukmejian, 731 F. Supp. 1448, recon. granted in 
part, 746 F. Supp. 976 (N.D. Cal. 1990); Coalition for Clean Air v. 
South Coast Air Quality Mgt. Dist., No. CV 97--6916--HLH, (C.D. Cal. 
Aug. 27, 1999). Further, if a state fails to meet its commitments, 
EPA could make a finding of failure to implement the SIP under CAA 
Section 179(a), which starts an 18-month period for the State to 
correct the nonimplementation before mandatory sanctions are 
imposed.
    \15\ CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) provides that each SIP ``shall 
include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, 
means or techniques* * * as well as schedules and timetables for 
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the 
applicable requirement of the Act.'' Section 172(c)(6) of the Act, 
which applies to nonattainment SIPs, is virtually identical to 
section 110(a)(2)(A). The language in these sections of the CAA is 
quite broad, allowing a SIP to contain any ``means or techniques'' 
that EPA determines are ``necessary or appropriate'' to meet CAA 
requirements, such that the area will attain as expeditiously as 
practicable but no later than the designated date. Furthermore, the 
express allowance for ``schedules and timetables'' demonstrates that 
Congress understood that all required controls might not have to be 
in place before a SIP could be fully approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an initial matter, EPA believes that circumstances in the San 
Francisco Bay Area warrant the consideration of enforceable 
commitments. With respect to the commitment to adopt additional 
measures to ensure attainment by 2006, we have concluded that, at the 
time of plan adoption, the State and co-lead agencies had adopted, or 
had committed to adopt, all reasonably available VOC control measures 
and that no additional measures could be identified. As discussed in 
more detail below, the great bulk of emission reductions needed for 
attainment comes from stringent regulations already fully adopted by 
the co-lead agencies, the State, or the federal government. These 
previously adopted measures include CARB regulations governing area and 
mobile sources, BAAQMD regulations governing stationary sources, and 
federal regulations such as standards that apply to diesel engines and 
locomotives.
    Moreover, after reviewing measures included in other SIPs as well 
as measures recommended by the public, the co-lead agencies concluded 
that they had already adopted, or were committing in the 2001 Plan to 
adopt, essentially all VOC measures that were currently in place in 
other areas of the country (2001 Plan, page 49). Furthermore, the 
BAAQMD concluded that they have established or committed to establish 
emissions limits on VOC sources that are equivalent to those in place 
in the one extreme area in the country--the South Coast. See 2001 Plan, 
page 49.
    In July 2001, the co-lead agencies and CARB notified EPA that they 
were unable at the time to identify and therefore adopt any additional 
programs that would reduce VOC emissions sufficient to fill the 
shortfall. Because the State and co-lead agencies need additional time 
to consider technologies still in the developmental stages, EPA 
determined that it is appropriate to consider enforceable commitments 
for the remaining necessary reductions.
    EPA has also concluded that it was not practicable for the co-lead 
agencies to complete the rule development and adoption processes prior 
to plan submittal for the 13 new, identified control measures to which 
the plan commits and therefore consideration of enforceable commitments 
is warranted. Because the vast majority of VOC sources are already 
subject to stringent, adopted rules, it is increasingly difficult to 
develop regulations for the remaining universe of uncontrolled sources. 
For example, BAAQMD has committed to adopt an improved architectural 
coatings rule (see table 2 above). This effort requires an assessment 
of the emissions reduction potential of establishing coatings 
restrictions for very small sources, including time-consuming industry 
surveys and the refinement of emissions factors and emissions 
inventories. Adoption of stringent new coatings limits also involves 
collection or development of information to resolve coating performance 
issues for a large variety of different coatings and applications. 
Other rules require similar complex research and development work, 
analysis of compliance options and necessary exemptions, examination of 
test methodologies (an especially important concern where the VOC 
emissions standards, as in the Bay Area, approach the monitoring 
detection limits), and development of provisions to prevent increased 
reliance on toxic

[[Page 42180]]

air pollutants and stratospheric ozone depleting compounds as the means 
of compliance with very tight VOC restrictions.
    Finally, EPA has determined that the submission of enforceable 
commitments for the adoption of identified control measures and 
additional measures necessary to achieve attainment by 2006 will not 
interfere with the Bay Area's ability to make reasonable progress 
toward attainment of the standard. By the end of 2003, which is the 
midpoint between the date of the plan and the attainment year, 46% of 
the required VOC reductions will have been achieved.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For additional detail, see the co-lead agencies' April 10, 
2003 progress report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As provided above, after concluding that the circumstances warrant 
consideration of an enforceable commitment--as they do in the San 
Francisco Bay Area--EPA will consider three factors in determining 
whether to approve the submitted commitments. These factors are 
satisfactorily addressed with respect to CARB's and the co-lead 
agencies' commitments to adopt and submit both the specified control 
measures and additional measures to fill the shortfall of VOC emissions 
reductions.
1. The Commitments Address a Limited Portion of the 2001 Plan
    According to the 2001 Plan, 148 tpd of VOC reductions and 123 tpd 
of NOX reductions are required to attain the 1-hour ozone 
standard. As noted above, the State, the co-lead agencies and the 
federal government have previously adopted measures that will in large 
part achieve the required reductions by providing 108.6 tpd of VOC 
reductions and 122.8 tpd of NOX reductions. (2001 Plan, 
Tables 10 and 11.) This is reflected in the Bay Area planning 
inventory, which incorporates future year emission reductions from all 
regulations adopted as of December 31, 2000. Table 4 of the 2001 Plan 
shows that previously adopted mobile source regulations will reduce on-
road motor vehicle VOC emissions from 227.0 tpd in 2001 to 168.5 tpd in 
2006, and off-road mobile source emissions from 67.3 tpd to 54.0 tpd. 
As a result of previously adopted consumer products regulations, VOC 
emissions from this category will be reduced from 52.2 tpd to 46.4 tpd 
for the same period. These sharp reductions take into account 
substantial growth in population and activity levels. Previously 
adopted BAAQMD regulations contribute additional reductions in VOC 
emissions from industrial and commercial sources, whose emissions are 
reduced from 171.2 tpd in 2001 to 157.0 tpd in 2006.
    In contrast, the new, identified control measures to which the 
BAAQMD commits in the plan are expected to reduce VOC emissions by only 
12.7 tpd and NOX emissions by 0.7 tpd by 2006. The 2001 
Plan's commitment to adopt additional unspecified measures to fill the 
shortfall needed to reach attainment will achieve 26 tpd of VOCs. Thus, 
these combined commitments represent a relatively small amount of the 
total reductions needed for attainment, only 0.6% of NOX 
reductions and 26% of VOC reductions, or 14% of total reductions needed 
to reach attainment.
2. The State and the Co-lead Agencies Are Capable of Fulfilling their 
Commitment
    In many cases the new measures that are the subject to commitments 
in the 2001 Plan have already been adopted and/or implemented and 
emissions reductions are being achieved. For example, Rule 8-3 (SS-11) 
was adopted on November 21, 2001 and submitted to EPA on June 18, 2002; 
Rule 8-5 (SS-12) was adopted on November 27, 2002 and submitted to EPA 
on January 21, 2003; Rules 8-14 and 8-19 (SS-13) and Rule 8-16 (SS-14) 
were adopted on October 16, 2002 and submitted to EPA on April 1, 
2003.\17\ Furthermore, we are confident that CARB and the co-lead 
agencies will be able to meet the 26 tpd commitment. They have made 
progress on their further study measures and, if necessary, could adopt 
a declining VOC cap applicable to stationary sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For additional detail, see the co-lead agencies' April 10, 
2003 progress report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. The Commitments Are for a Reasonable and Appropriate Period of Time
    The adoption, implementation, and submittal dates for the new 
control measures reflect a reasonable amount of time for the 
development and implementation of each measure. The commitment to 
identify the control measures that will enable the Bay Area to reach 
attainment must be fulfilled by March 2004, when the revised plan is to 
be adopted by the co-lead agencies. In light of the co-lead agencies' 
demonstration that they need additional time to consider technologies 
that are still in the developmental stages, this time frame is 
reasonable and appropriate.
    For the above reasons, EPA is proposing to approve as one element 
of the attainment assessment the 2001 Plan's enforceable commitments to 
adopt and submit the specified control measures listed in II.C. above 
and to adopt additional measures as necessary to attain the 1-hour 
ozone standard by 2006, which we find to be the most expeditious 
attainment date practicable. Based on the previously adopted measures 
and these commitments, the 2001 Plan demonstrates that the Bay Area 
will achieve sufficient reductions to attain the 1-hour ozone standard 
by 2006. Therefore we are proposing to approve these commitments and 
the attainment assessment as meeting the requirements of section 
172(c)(1) of the CAA.

E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Use in Transportation Conformity

    EPA's conformity rule, 40 CFR part 93, requires that transportation 
plans, programs, and projects conform to the SIP and establishes the 
criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do conform. 
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will produce 
no new air quality violations, will not worsen existing violations, and 
will not delay timely attainment of the NAAQS (CAA section 176(c)(1)).
    One of the primary tests for conformity is to show that 
transportation plans and improvement programs will not cause motor 
vehicle emissions higher than the levels needed to make progress toward 
and to meet the air quality standards. The motor vehicle emissions 
levels needed to make progress toward and to meet the air quality 
standards are set in the area's air quality implementation plans and 
are known as the ``motor vehicle emissions budgets.'' Emissions budgets 
are established for specific years and specific pollutants. See 40 CFR 
Part 93.118(a). The 2001 Plan (page 30) includes budgets of 164.0 tpd 
for VOC and 270.3 tpd for NOX, both for the attainment year, 
2006. These budgets are based on projected emissions for motor vehicles 
in the attainment year and take into account expected growth and were 
developed using San Francisco Bay Area EMFAC 2000.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ EMFAC is California's motor vehicle emissions model and is 
similar to EPA's Mobile 6 model, which is used elsewhere outside of 
California. EPA approved EMFAC 2000 for use in the Bay Area on 
January 11, 2002 (67 FR 1464).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 14, 2002 we found the 2006 motor vehicle emission 
budgets in the 2001 Plan adequate for transportation conformity 
purposes. The adequacy finding was based on our preliminary 
determination that the plan provides for timely attainment of the 1-
hour ozone standard in the San Francisco Bay Area and that the criteria

[[Page 42181]]

in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) of the conformity rule were satisfied. As a 
result of our adequacy finding, the Metropolitan Transportation 
Commission and the Federal Highway Administration are required to use 
these budgets in conformity analyses.
    Upon further review, EPA has confirmed its preliminary 
determination that the submitted plan demonstrates attainment in the 
Bay Area by 2006 and that the motor vehicle emissions budgets are 
consistent with the plan. The budgets were derived using the most 
accurate and up-to-date planning assumptions and emissions model 
available at the time of the plan submittal. We are therefore proposing 
to approve the 2006 motor vehicle emissions budgets.
    The co-lead agencies and CARB have committed to completing a mid-
course review of the plan by December 15, 2003 and to submit a revised 
plan by April 15, 2004. In order to be approvable, the new plan must 
derive its inventory and motor vehicle emissions budgets using 
EMFAC2002, which is an updated and improved revision to EMFAC2000 that 
was recently approved and is now available for SIP planning (68 FR 
15720, April 1, 2003).
    Because EMFAC2000 has certain technical limitations, EPA approved 
it only for use in development of ozone motor vehicle emissions factors 
for SIP development and future conformity determinations in the San 
Francisco Bay Area. It was superior to prior models available for use 
in the area and the improved EMFAC 2002 was not yet available.
    EPA is proposing to approve the EMFAC2000-derived motor vehicle 
emission budgets in the Bay Area ozone SIP only until new budgets 
developed with the new model are submitted pursuant to commitments in 
the SIP and found adequate for conformity purposes. See 67 FR 1464, 
January 11, 2002. Normally, new budgets cannot replace existing budgets 
in approved plans if they are for the same Clean Air Act requirement 
and year until the new budgets are approved as part of the SIP (see 40 
CFR 93.118(e)). In this case, our approval of the budgets in the 2001 
Plan will expire upon EPA's determination that the new budgets, which 
will be developed using EMFAC2002 and are scheduled to be submitted in 
April 2004, are adequate. We have taken this approach because budgets 
developed with EMFAC2002 will be more accurate than those developed 
using EMFAC2000. An adequacy determination can usually be made within a 
few months of plan submission. Therefore, by limiting the duration of 
our approval of the EMFAC2000-derived budgets to the point when the 
updated budgets are found to be adequate, the updated budgets may be in 
place within a few months of their submission, rather than when the SIP 
is finally approved, which could take as long as 18 months.

III. Mid-Course Review and 2004 Plan

    The co-lead agencies and CARB have made an enforceable commitment 
to perform a mid-course review by December 15, 2003 that will include 
an evaluation of the modeling from the CCOS and the latest technical 
information (e.g., inventory and monitoring data) to determine the 
level of emission reductions needed to attain the ozone standard. The 
co-lead agencies have also committed to adopt a SIP revision by March 
2004 that includes a revised attainment target and new control measures 
as needed to attain by 2006. In addition, the co-lead agencies and CARB 
committed to submit a revised ozone attainment plan by April 15, 2004 
that will include new control measures as needed to attain by 2006. As 
discussed in section II.D. above, EPA is proposing to approve these 
commitments as part of the attainment assessment under CAA section 
172(c)(1).
    The commitments have been adopted by CARB and the co-lead agencies 
for several reasons. As noted in Section II.D. above, the 2001 Plan's 
modeling assessment has its limitations, which are the direct result of 
the shortage of key input data. This lack of input data has resulted in 
some uncertainty regarding the amount of emissions reductions that will 
be necessary to attain the 1-hour ozone standard. However, the CCOS 
will provide a more comprehensive and reliable data base for future 
ozone analyses. The modeling for the 2004 Plan will use recent episodes 
from 1999 and 2000 and will be supported by more extensive field 
measurements.\19\ It will also rely on improved emission inventory 
modeling and meteorological inputs. This information should result in a 
more reliable determination of whether the amount of emissions 
reductions required in the 2001 Plan will be sufficient for the Bay 
Area to attain the ozone standard. The information will be used to 
establish revised attainment targets, if necessary, in the 2004 plan. 
In addition, the CCOS should illuminate the contribution that pollution 
generated in the Bay Area makes to air quality in downwind areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ An overview of the photochemical modeling for the Bay 
Area's 2004 ozone attainment plan is available on line at http://www.baagmd.gov/planning/2004sip/modelpg.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The mid-course review and 2004 plan revision will also provide the 
co-lead agencies an opportunity to update key information in the plan 
that is currently being refined by additional study. As noted above, 
EPA recently approved EMFAC2002, California's new motor vehicle 
emissions model. Use of EMFAC2002 will improve the accuracy of the 
motor vehicle emissions inventory, which will allow planners to better 
forecast the impact of transportation projects on air quality and to 
adjust the motor vehicle emissions budgets. In addition, the co-lead 
agencies and CARB have committed to study specified measures to 
determine whether significant additional emission reductions can be 
achieved and whether implementation is feasible. As noted in section 
II.B. above, EPA is proposing to approve this commitment. The MTC's and 
BAAQMD's ongoing work on their further study measures is providing new 
information, particularly with regard to refinery and marine vessel 
loading emissions, that will result in inventory corrections and should 
lead to the adoption of new control measures. The information generated 
by the further study measures and work being done in other areas of the 
country will also enable the co-lead agencies to update their RACM 
analysis. The progress that has been made in all of these areas, both 
locally and nationally, should enable the co-lead agencies and CARB to 
submit a more technically advanced plan in 2004.

IV. Summary of Proposed Action

    Because EPA has determined that these plan elements meet the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c), the Agency is proposing to approve 
the emissions inventory and the RACM demonstration. EPA is also 
proposing to approve, as meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(1), 
the attainment assessment and associated motor vehicle emissions 
budgets, and commitments to (1) adopt 13 new stationary, area, mobile 
source, and transportation control measures; (2) conduct a mid-course 
review by December 15, 2003 that will include an evaluation of the 
modeling from the Central California Ozone Study and the latest 
technical information (inventory data, monitoring, etc.) to determine 
whether the level of emission reductions in the 2001 Plan is sufficient 
to attain the 1-hour ozone standard; (3) to adopt a SIP revision by 
March 2004 that includes a revised attainment target

[[Page 42182]]

and new control measures as needed to attain by 2006; and (4) to submit 
the SIP revision to EPA by April 15, 2004. Finally, we are proposing to 
approve under section 110(k)(3) as strengthening the SIP the commitment 
to study specified measures to determine whether significant additional 
emission reductions can be achieved and whether implementation is 
feasible.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ EPA is aware of the pending lawsuit regarding the 2001 Plan 
in California Superior Court in San Francisco, Communities for a 
Better Environment et al. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management 
District et al., Case No. 323849. Prior to taking final action on 
the plan, we will evaluate any decision of the Court in that case to 
determine what effect, if any, it has on our rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Elsewhere in this Federal Register we are making an interim final 
determination that the 2001 Plan corrects the deficiencies in the 1999 
Plan. As a result of this determination, the offset sanction is stayed 
while EPA considers whether to issue a final full approval. A final 
full approval action on these elements would terminate the sanctions 
clock that was started as a result of the earlier disapproval; if we 
disapprove the 2001 Plan on the basis that one or more of the 
disapproved components is still insufficient, the offset sanction will 
apply on the effective date of the disapproval.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does 
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: July 7, 2003.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-17972 Filed 7-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U