[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 72404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30305]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9495-4]


Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Submitted 
PM10 Maintenance Plan for Sacramento County; CA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that the Agency 
has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of a nominal 10 microns 
or less (PM10) for the years 2008, 2012, and 2022 in the 
PM10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation 
Request for Sacramento County (October 28, 2010) (``Sacramento 
PM10 Plan'') are adequate for transportation conformity 
purposes. The Sacramento PM10 Plan was submitted to EPA on 
December 7, 2010 by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as a 
revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) and includes 
a maintenance plan for the 1987 24-hour PM10 national 
ambient air quality standard. As a result of our adequacy findings, the 
Sacramento Area Council of Governments and the U.S. Department of 
Transportation must use the MVEBs for future conformity determinations.

DATES: This finding is effective December 8, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, U.S. EPA, Region IX, 
Air Division AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, 
(415) 972-3963 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have 
already made. EPA Region IX sent a letter to CARB on November 4, 2011 
stating that the MVEBs in the submitted Sacramento PM10 Plan 
for the years of 2008, 2012 and 2022 are adequate. The finding is 
available at EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. The adequate MVEBs are provided 
in the following table:

                       Sacramento PM10 Plan MVEBs
                      [Winter season, tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Oxides of
                   Budget year                     nitrogen      PM10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008............................................          50          15
2012............................................          38          15
2022............................................          19          17
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Receipt of the MVEBs in the Sacramento PM10 Plan was 
announced on EPA's transportation conformity Web site on September 1, 
2011. We received no comments in response to the adequacy review 
posting. The finding is available at EPA's transportation conformity 
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.
    Transportation conformity is required by Clean Air Act section 
176(c). EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, 
transportation improvement programs, and projects conform to SIPs and 
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not 
they do conform. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation 
activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air 
quality standards.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's MVEBs are 
adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) 
which was promulgated in our August 15, 1997 final rule (62 FR 43780, 
43781-43783). We have further described our process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004 final rule (69 FR 
40004, 40038), and we used the information in these resources in making 
our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is 
separate from EPA's completeness review, and should not be used to 
prejudge EPA's ultimate approval action for the SIP. Even if we find a 
budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

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

    Dated: November 4, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-30305 Filed 11-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P