[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34608-34611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14479]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0131, FRL-9317-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of California; Interstate Transport

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the California Regional Haze Plan (``CRHP''), 
a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (``SIP'') 
addressing Clean Air Act (``CAA'' or ``Act'') requirements and EPA's 
rules for states to prevent and remedy future and existing 
anthropogenic impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I areas 
through a regional haze program. Regional haze is caused by emissions 
of air pollutants from many sources located over a wide geographic 
area. Also, EPA is approving certain portions of the CRHP and the 
``Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 8-hour Ozone 
and PM2.5 to satisfy the Requirements of Clean Air Act 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the State of California'' (``2007 Transport 
SIP''), submitted by California on November 16, 2007, as meeting the 
requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding interference 
with other states' measures to protect visibility for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone and 1997 particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA proposed to approve these SIP 
revisions on March 15, 2011 (76 FR 13944).

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on July 14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0131 for 
this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While 
all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, 
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume 
reports), and some may not be available at either location (e.g., 
confidential business information (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy 
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours 
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Wamsley, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Planning Office, Air-2, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; via telephone at (415) 947-
4111; or via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' or 
``our,'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. The Regional Haze Problem
    B. The CAA Requirements and EPA's Regional Haze Rule
    C. Interstate Transport Pollution and Visibility Requirements
    D. Our Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. The Regional Haze Problem

    Regional haze is visibility impairment produced by many sources and 
activities located across a broad geographic area that emit fine 
particles (PM2.5) (e.g., sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, 
elemental carbon, and soil dust), and their precursors (e.g., sulfur 
dioxide

[[Page 34609]]

(SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and in some 
cases, ammonia (NH3) and volatile organic compounds (VOC)). 
Fine particle precursors react in the atmosphere to form fine 
particulate matter that impairs visibility by scattering and absorbing 
light, thereby reducing the clarity, color, and visible distance that 
one can see. Also, PM2.5 can cause serious health effects 
and mortality in humans and contributes to environmental impacts, such 
as acid deposition and eutrophication of water bodies.
    Data from the existing visibility monitoring network, the 
``Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments'' (IMPROVE) 
monitoring network, show that visibility impairment caused by air 
pollution occurs nearly all the time at most national park and 
wilderness areas. The average visual range in many Class I areas (i.e., 
national parks and memorial parks, wilderness areas, and international 
parks meeting certain size criteria) in the western United States is 
100-150 kilometers, or about one-half to two-thirds of the visual range 
that would exist without anthropogenic air pollution.\1\ In most of the 
eastern Class I areas of the United States, the average visual range is 
less than 30 kilometers, or about one-fifth of the visual range that 
would exist under estimated natural conditions. 64 FR 35715 (July 1, 
1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Visual range is the greatest distance, in kilometers or 
miles, at which a dark object can be viewed against the sky.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The CAA Requirements and EPA's Regional Haze Rule

    In section 169A(a)(1) of the CAA Amendments of 1977, Congress 
created a program to protect visibility in the nation's national parks 
and wilderness areas.\2\ This section of the CAA establishes as a 
national goal the ``prevention of any future, and the remedying of any 
existing, impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas 
which impairment results from manmade air pollution.'' On December 2, 
1980, EPA promulgated regulations to address visibility impairment in 
Class I areas that is ``reasonably attributable'' to a single source or 
small group of sources, i.e., ``reasonably attributable visibility 
impairment'' (RAVI) (45 FR 80084). These regulations represented the 
first phase in addressing visibility impairment. EPA deferred action on 
regional haze that emanates from a variety of sources until monitoring, 
modeling, and scientific knowledge about the relationships between 
pollutants and visibility impairment were improved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal areas consist 
of national parks exceeding 6000 acres, wilderness areas and 
national memorial parks exceeding 5000 acres, and all international 
parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977. 42 U.S.C. 7472(a). 
In accordance with section 169A of the CAA and after consulting with 
the Department of Interior, EPA promulgated a list of 156 areas 
where visibility is identified as an important value. 44 FR 69122 
(November 30, 1979). The extent of a mandatory Class I area includes 
subsequent changes in boundaries, such as park expansions. 42 U.S.C. 
7472(a). Although states and Tribes may designate as Class I 
additional areas which they consider to have visibility as an 
important value, the requirements of the visibility program set 
forth in section 169A of the CAA apply only to ``mandatory Class I 
Federal areas.'' Each mandatory Class I Federal area is the 
responsibility of a ``Federal Land Manager.'' 42 U.S.C. 7602(i). 
When we use the term ``Class I area'' in this action, we mean a 
``mandatory Class I Federal area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the CAA Amendments of 1990, Congress added section 169B to 
address regional haze issues. EPA promulgated a rule to address 
regional haze on July 1, 1999, the Regional Haze Rule (RHR) (64 FR 
35713). The RHR revised the existing visibility regulations to 
integrate provisions addressing regional haze impairment and to 
establish a comprehensive visibility protection program for Class I 
areas. The requirements for regional haze, found at 40 CFR 51.308 and 
51.309, are included in EPA's visibility protection regulations at 40 
CFR 51.300-309. The requirement to submit a regional haze plan revision 
to the SIP applies to all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the 
Virgin Islands.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Albuquerque/Bernalillo County in New Mexico must also submit 
a regional haze SIP to completely satisfy the requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA for the entire State of New Mexico 
under the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (section 74-2-4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a more detailed discussion of the CAA and RHR requirements, 
please see sections II and III of our March 15, 2011 proposal (76 FR 
13944). Our evaluation of the California Regional Haze Plan can be 
found in Section IV of the same proposal.

C. Interstate Transport Pollution and Visibility Requirements

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated new NAAQS for 8-hour ozone and 
for PM2.5 (62 FR 38856; 62 FR 38652). Section 110(a)(1) 
requires each state to submit a plan to address certain requirements 
for a new or revised NAAQS within three years after promulgation of 
such standards, or within such shorter time as EPA may prescribe. 
Section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that such new plan submissions 
must address, as applicable, including section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which 
pertains to the interstate transport of certain emissions.
    The ``good neighbor'' provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the 
CAA require each state to have a SIP that prohibits emissions that 
adversely affect other states in the ways contemplated in the statute. 
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains four distinct requirements related to 
the impacts of interstate transport. The SIP must contain adequate 
provisions prohibiting sources in the state from emitting air 
pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute significantly to 
nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other state; (2) interfere with 
maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state; (3) interfere with 
provisions to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in any 
other state; or, (4) interfere with efforts to protect visibility in 
any other state.
    The regional haze program, as reflected in the RHR, recognizes the 
importance of addressing the long-range transport of pollutants for 
visibility and encourages states to work together to develop plans to 
address haze. The regulations explicitly require each state to address 
its ``share'' of the emission reductions needed to meet the reasonable 
progress goals for neighboring Class I areas. Working together through 
a regional planning process, states are required to address an agreed 
upon share of their contribution to visibility impairment in the Class 
I areas of their neighbors. 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3)(ii). Given these 
requirements, we anticipate that regional haze SIPs will contain 
measures that will achieve these emissions reductions, and that these 
measures will meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
    California's 2007 Transport SIP states that the Regional Haze SIP 
would address interstate regional haze impacts. We interpreted this to 
mean that California intended for the Regional Haze Plan to address the 
interstate visibility requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 
1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, our 
evaluation of the 2007 Transport SIP and whether it meets these CAA 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) visibility requirements relied on our 
evaluation of relevant information from the CRHP.
    For a more detailed discussion of the requirements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) and our evaluation of how the 2007 Transport SIP and 
relevant portions of the CRHP meet these requirements, please see 
sections II.D and V of our March 15, 2011 proposal (76 FR 13944).

D. Our Proposed Action

    On March 15, 2011, EPA proposed to approve: (i) The California 
Regional

[[Page 34610]]

Haze Plan (CRHP) as meeting the relevant requirements of CAA section 
169B and the Regional Haze Rule; and (ii) the 2007 Transport SIP and 
certain portions of the CRHP as meeting the requirements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding interference with other states' measures 
to protect visibility for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 13944).
    Regarding our proposed approval of the CRHP, we proposed to find 
that California met the following Regional Haze Rule requirements: The 
State established baseline visibility conditions and reasonable 
progress goals for each of its Class I areas; the State developed a 
long-term strategy with enforceable measures ensuring reasonable 
progress towards meeting the reasonable progress goals for the first 
ten-year planning period, through 2018; the State adequately addressed 
the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology to specific 
stationary sources; the State has an adequate regional haze monitoring 
strategy; the State provided for consultation and coordination with 
Federal land managers in producing its regional haze plan; and, the 
State provided for the regional haze plan's future revisions.
    Regarding our proposed approval of California's 2007 Transport SIP, 
we proposed to find that the following specific elements of the CRHP 
satisfied the CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement to prohibit 
emissions that will interfere with measures to protect visibility in 
another state for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS: Chapter 3 (Emissions Inventory), chapter 4 (California 2018 
Progress Strategy), and chapter 8 (Consultation).
    For the portion of today's final action related to the 2007 
Transport SIP, we are taking final action only with regard to the 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement that the SIP must contain 
adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions 
activity in California from emitting pollutants that will interfere 
with another state's measures to protect visibility. EPA intends to act 
in separate rulemakings on other portions of California's 2007 
Transport SIP that address the remaining elements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 
NAAQS.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The other elements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require 
that the California SIP contain adequate provisions prohibiting 
emission sources within the State from emitting any air pollutant in 
amounts which will: (a) Contribute significantly to nonattainment of 
the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in any other State; 
(b) interfere with maintenance of these standards by any other 
State; and, (c) interfere with any other State's measures required 
under Part C of the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air 
quality. On March 17, 2011, we proposed to approve California's 2007 
Transport SIP as meeting the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(I) 
requirements that the California SIP contain adequate provisions to 
ensure that emissions from California do not significantly 
contribute to nonattainment of, or interfere with maintenance of, 
the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 PM2.5 standards in other 
states (76 FR 14616).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed to approve the CRHP and the 2007 Transport SIP because 
we determined that they complied with the relevant CAA requirements. 
Our proposed action provides more information about the relevant CAA 
requirements, EPA guidance, the state's submittals, and our review and 
evaluation of these SIP revisions.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. We 
received no comments.

III. EPA Action

    Under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully approving the 
California Regional Haze Plan as satisfying all of the relevant 
requirements of Section 169B and the Regional Haze Rule. Specifically, 
we find that California has met the following Regional Haze Rule 
requirements: The State established baseline visibility conditions and 
reasonable progress goals for each of its Class I areas; the State 
developed a long-term strategy with enforceable measures ensuring 
reasonable progress towards meeting the reasonable progress goals for 
the first ten-year planning period, through 2018; the State has 
adequately addressed the application of Best Available Retrofit 
Technology to specific stationary sources; the State has an adequate 
regional haze monitoring strategy; the State provided for consultation 
and coordination with Federal land managers in producing its regional 
haze plan; and, the State provided for the regional haze plan's future 
revisions.
    In addition, under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, we are fully 
approving the 2007 Transport SIP and the following specific elements of 
the CRHP as satisfying the CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement 
to prohibit emissions that will interfere with measures to protect 
visibility in another state for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS: Chapter 3 (Emissions Inventory), chapter 4 
(California 2018 Progress Strategy), and, chapter 8 (Consultation).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive 
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the 
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, 
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct

[[Page 34611]]

costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 15, 2011. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Visibility, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 9, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52 [AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(386) and (c)(387) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (386) The following plan was submitted on November 16, 2007, by the 
Governor's Designee.
    (i) [Reserved].
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) California Air Resources Board (CARB).
    (1) CARB Resolution 07-28, dated September 27, 2007, adopting the 
``2007 State Implementation Plan for the 1997 ozone and 
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (``2007 State 
Strategy'').
    (2) ``Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 
1997 8-hour Ozone Standard and PM2.5 to satisfy the 
Requirements of Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the State of 
California (September 21, 2007),'' as modified by Attachment A and 
submitted as Appendix C to the 2007 State Strategy (``2007 Transport 
SIP''), at page 5 (``Evaluation of Interference with Other States' 
Measures Required to Meet Regional Haze and Visibility SIP 
Requirements'').
    (387) The following plan was submitted on March 16, 2009, by the 
Governor's Designee.
    (i) [Reserved].
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) California Air Resources Board (CARB).
    (1) CARB Resolution 09-4, dated January 22, 2009, adopting the 
``California Regional Haze Plan''.
    (2) The ``California Regional Haze Plan'', adopted on January 22, 
2009, as amended and supplemented on September 8, 2009 in a ``letter 
from James N. Goldstene, CARB to Laura Yoshii, United States 
Environmental Protection Agency'', and as amended and supplemented on 
June 9, 2010 in a ``letter from James N. Goldstene, CARB to Jared 
Blumenfeld, United States Environmental Protection Agency''.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.281 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.281  Visibility protection.

* * * * *
    (f) Approval. On March 16, 2009, the California Air Resources Board 
submitted the ``California Regional Haze Plan'' (``CRHP''). The CRHP, 
as amended and supplemented on September 8, 2009 and June 9, 2010, 
meets the requirements of Clean Air Act section 169B and the Regional 
Haze Rule in 40 CFR 51.308.

0
4. Part 52 is amended by adding a new Sec.  52.283 to read as follows:


Sec.  52.283  Interstate Transport.

    (a) Approval. On November 16, 2007, the California Air Resources 
Board submitted the ``Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard and PM2.5 to 
satisfy the Requirements of Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for 
the State of California (September 21, 2007)'' (``2007 Transport 
SIP''). The 2007 Transport SIP and the additional plan elements listed 
below meet the following specific requirements of Clean Air Act section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS (``1997 standards'').
    (1) The requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding 
interference with other states' measures to protect visibility for the 
1997 standards are met by chapter 3 (Emissions Inventory), chapter 4 
(California 2018 Progress Strategy), and chapter 8 (Consultation) of 
the ``California Regional Haze Plan,'' adopted January 22, 2009.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (b) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2011-14479 Filed 6-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P