[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 128 (Thursday, July 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40026-40057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12690]
[[Page 40025]]
Vol. 85
Thursday,
No. 128
July 2, 2020
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas
for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast Moderate
Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 128 / Thursday, July 2, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 40026]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145; FRL-10010-50-Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of
Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast
Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve or conditionally approve portions of a state implementation
plan (SIP) revision submitted by California to address Clean Air Act
(CAA or ``Act'') requirements for the 2006 and 2012 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or ``standards'') in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin (``South
Coast'') PM2.5 nonattainment area. Specifically, the EPA is
proposing to approve all but the contingency measure element of the
submitted SIP revision as meeting all applicable Moderate area
requirements for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and to
conditionally approve the contingency measure element as meeting both
the Moderate area contingency measure requirement for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and the Serious area contingency measure
requirement for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition,
the EPA is proposing to approve 2019 and 2022 motor vehicle emissions
budgets for use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is also proposing to reclassify
the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area, including
reservation areas of Indian country and any other area of Indian
country within it where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the
tribe has jurisdiction, as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on the EPA's determination that the
area cannot practicably attain the standard by the applicable Moderate
area attainment date of December 31, 2021. Upon final reclassification
of the South Coast as a Serious area for this NAAQS, California will be
required to submit a Serious area plan for the area that includes a
demonstration of attainment by the applicable Serious area attainment
date, which is no later than December 31, 2025, or by the most
expeditious alternative date practicable, in accordance with the
requirements of part D of title I of the CAA.
DATES: Any comments on this proposal must be received by August 3,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0145 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (e.g., audio or video) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3877, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background for Proposed Action
II. Summary of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
III. Clean Air Act Requirements for Moderate PM2.5
Nonattainment Area Plans
IV. Completeness Review of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
V. Review of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
A. Emissions Inventory
B. PM2.5 Precursors
C. Air Quality Modeling
D. Reasonably Available Control Measures and Control Strategy
E. Major Stationary Source Control Requirements Under CAA
Section 189(e)
F. Demonstration That Attainment by the Moderate Area Attainment
Date Is Impracticable
G. Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative Milestones
H. Contingency Measures
I. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
VI. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Serious Area SIP
Requirements
A. Reclassification as Serious and Applicable Attainment Date
B. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious PM2.5
Nonattainment Area Plans
C. Statutory Deadline for Submittal of the Serious Area Plan
VII. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country
VIII. Summary of Proposed Actions and Request for Public Comment
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for Proposed Action
On October 17, 2006, the EPA strengthened the 24-hour (daily) NAAQS
for particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less
(PM2.5) by lowering the level from 65 micrograms ([micro]g)
per cubic meter (m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ (``2006 PM2.5
NAAQS'').\1\ On January 15, 2013, the EPA strengthened the primary
annual NAAQS for PM2.5 by lowering the level from 15.0
[micro]g/m\3\ to 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ (``2012 PM2.5
NAAQS'').\2\ The EPA established these standards after considering
substantial evidence from numerous health studies demonstrating that
serious health effects are associated with exposures to
PM2.5 concentrations above these levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 71 FR 61144 and 40 CFR 50.13. The EPA first established
NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), including
annual standards of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of
annual mean concentrations and 24-hour (daily) standards of 65
[micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 98th percentile 24-hour
concentrations (40 CFR 50.7).
\2\ 78 FR 3086 and 40 CFR 50.18. Unless otherwise noted, all
references to the PM2.5 standards in this notice are to
the 2012 annual NAAQS of 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ codified at 40 CFR
50.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature
mortality. Other important health effects associated with
PM2.5 exposure include aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions,
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted
activity days), changes in lung function, and increased respiratory
symptoms. Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5
exposure include older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and
children.\3\ PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the
atmosphere as a solid or liquid particle (``primary PM2.5''
or ``direct PM2.5'') or can be formed in the atmosphere
(``secondary PM2.5'') as a result of various chemical
reactions among precursor pollutants such as nitrogen oxides
(NOX), sulfur oxides (SOX), volatile organic
[[Page 40027]]
compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id.
\4\ EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, No. EPA/
600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF, October 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, the EPA
designated the South Coast area as nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.\5\ The EPA classified the area as Moderate
nonattainment on June 2, 2014 and reclassified it as Serious
nonattainment for these NAAQS on January 13, 2016.\6\ On January 15,
2015, the EPA designated and classified the South Coast area as
Moderate nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\7\ The
South Coast area is also designated and classified as Moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 74 FR 58688 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
\6\ 79 FR 31566 and 81 FR 1514. The EPA promulgated these
PM2.5 nonattainment area classifications in response to a
2013 decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanding
the EPA's prior implementation rule for the PM2.5 NAAQS
and directing the EPA to promulgate implementation rules pursuant to
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act. Natural Resources Defense
Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
\7\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
\8\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005) (codified at 40 CFR 81.305). In
November 2007, California submitted the 2007 PM2.5 Plan
to provide for attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in
the South Coast. On November 9, 2011, the EPA approved all but the
contingency measures in the 2007 PM2.5 Plan (76 FR
69928), and on October 29, 2013, the EPA approved a revised
contingency measure SIP for the area (78 FR 64402). On July 25,
2016, the EPA determined that the South Coast area had attained the
1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 2011-2013
monitoring data, suspending any remaining attainment-related
planning requirements for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in this area (81 FR 48350).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 27, 2017, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
submitted the ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017)''
to provide for attainment of both the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast (``2016
PM2.5 Plan'' or ``Plan'').\9\ On February 12, 2019, the EPA
approved those portions of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan that pertain
to the requirements for implementing the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
except for the contingency measure component of the Plan.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX (transmitting ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
(March 2017)'').
\10\ 84 FR 3305. As part of this action, the EPA found that, for
purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirement for
contingency measures to be undertaken if the area fails to make RFP
under CAA section 172(c)(9) was moot as applied to the 2017
milestone year because CARB and the District had demonstrated to the
EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones in the plan had been
met. The EPA took no action with respect to RFP contingency measures
for the 2020 milestone year or attainment contingency measures for
these NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area is home to
about 17 million people, has a diverse economic base, and contains one
of the highest-volume port areas in the world. For a description of the
geographic boundaries of the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment
area, see 40 CFR 81.305. The local air district with primary
responsibility for developing a plan to attain the PM2.5
NAAQS in the South Coast area is the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD or ``District''). The District works cooperatively
with CARB in preparing these plans. Authority for regulating sources in
the South Coast is split between the District, which has responsibility
for regulating stationary and most area sources, and CARB, which has
responsibility for regulating most mobile sources and some categories
of consumer products.
II. Summary of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
We are proposing action on portions of a California SIP submission
that address the Moderate area plan requirements for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and the Serious area contingency measure
requirement for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the South
Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area. The SCAQMD Governing Board
adopted the ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017)'' on
March 3, 2017, and CARB submitted this SIP revision to the EPA on April
27, 2017.\11\ We refer to this SIP submission herein as the ``2016
PM2.5 Plan'' or ``Plan.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan is organized into eleven chapters,
each addressing a specific topic. We summarize below each of the
chapters relevant to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and the
contingency measure requirement for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.\12\ Chapter 1, ``Introduction,'' provides general background,
including a discussion of the purpose of the Plan, historical air
quality progress in the South Coast, and the District's approach to air
quality planning. Chapter 2, ``Air Quality and Health Effects,''
discusses current air quality in comparison with federal health-based
air pollution standards. Chapter 3, ``Base Year and Future Year
Emissions,'' summarizes emissions inventories, estimates current
emissions by source and pollutant, and projects future emissions with
and without growth. Chapter 4, ``Control Strategy and Implementation,''
presents the control strategy, specific measures, and implementation
schedules to attain the air quality standards by the specified
attainment dates. Chapter 5, ``Future Air Quality,'' describes the
modeling approach used in the Plan and summarizes the South Coast's
future air quality projections with and without the control strategy.
Chapter 6, ``Federal and State Clean Air Act Requirements,'' discusses
specific federal and state requirements as they pertain to the South
Coast, including anti-backsliding requirements for revoked standards.
Chapter 11, ``Public Process and Participation,'' describes the
District's public outreach effort associated with the development of
the Plan. Finally, a glossary is provided at the end of the document,
presenting definitions of terms commonly used in the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The following chapters in the Plan are not relevant to the
2006 or 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and were not reviewed as part of
this action: Chapter 7, ``Current and Future Air Quality--Desert
Nonattainment Areas,'' describes the air quality status of the
Coachella Valley, including emissions inventories, designations, and
current and future air quality. Chapter 8, ``Looking Beyond Current
Requirements,'' assesses the South Coast air basin's status with
respect to the 2015 8-hour ozone standard of 70 ppb. Chapter 9,
``Air Toxic Control Strategy,'' examines the ongoing efforts to
reduce health risk from toxic air contaminants, co-benefits from
reducing criteria pollutants, and potential future actions; and
Chapter 10, ``Climate and Energy,'' provides a description of
current and projected energy demand and supply issues in the South
Coast air basin, and the relationship between air quality
improvement and greenhouse gas mitigation goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan also includes the following technical appendices:
Appendix I (``Health Effects'') presents a summary of
scientific findings on the health effects of ambient air pollution.
Appendix II (``Current Air Quality'') contains a detailed
summary of the air quality in 2014, along with prior year trends, in
both the South Coast and the Coachella Valley.
Appendix III (``Base and Future Year Emission Inventory'')
presents the 2012 base year emissions inventory and projected emissions
inventories of air pollutants in future attainment years for both
annual average and summer planning inventories.
Appendix IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary and Mobile Source
Control Measures'') describes SCAQMD's proposed stationary and mobile
source control measures to attain the federal ozone and
PM2.5 standards.
Appendix IV-B (``CARB's Mobile Source Strategy'')
describes CARB's proposed 2016 strategy to attain health-based federal
air quality standards.
[[Page 40028]]
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and
Control Measures'') describes the Southern California Association of
Governments' (SCAG) ``Final 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/
Sustainable Communities Strategy'' and transportation control measures
included in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
Appendix V (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations'')
provides the details of the regional modeling for the attainment
demonstration.
Appendix VI (``Compliance with Other Clean Air Act
Requirements'') provides the District's demonstration that the Plan
complies with specific federal and California Clean Air Act
requirements.
CARB adopted additional documents on March 23, 2017 that supplement
the analyses and demonstrations adopted by the SCAQMD on March 3, 2017.
In particular, the ``CARB Staff Report, ARB Review of 2016 AQMP for the
South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley'' (``CARB Staff Report'')
includes in Appendix D a weight of evidence analysis for the SCAQMD's
attainment demonstration for the 24-hour and annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Also, to supplement the contingency measure element of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, CARB submitted a letter dated January 29, 2019
containing the District's commitment to adopt a control measure by a
date certain for purposes of satisfying CAA contingency measure
requirements for the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\13\ The
District later clarified its January 29, 2019 commitment in a letter
dated February 12, 2020, and CARB submitted the District's clarified
commitment together with related State commitments to the EPA by letter
dated March 3, 2020.\14\ We discuss these commitments as part of our
evaluation of the contingency measure element of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, in section V.H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Letter dated February 13, 2019, from Michael Benjamin, Air
Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Mike Stoker,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX (transmitting letter dated
January 29, 2019, from Wayne Nastri, Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to
Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB). In its January 29, 2019
letter, the District committed to modify an existing rule or adopt a
new rule to create a contingency measure that would be triggered if
the area fails to meet an RFP requirement, to submit a quantitative
milestone report, to meet a quantitative milestone, or to attain the
2006 24-hour or 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
\14\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael Benjamin, Air
Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Mike Stoker,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX (transmitting letter dated
February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri, Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to
Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB). In its February 12, 2020
letter, the District specifically committed to modify Rule 445
(``Wood Burning Devices'') to lower the mandatory wood burning
curtailment threshold in the rule following any of the EPA findings
listed in 40 CFR 51.1014(a). In its March 3, 2020 letter, CARB
committed to submit the revised District rule to the EPA as a SIP
revision by a date certain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We present our evaluation of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan in
Section V of this proposed rule.
III. Clean Air Act Requirements for Moderate PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
Plans
With respect to the statutory requirements for particulate matter
(PM) attainment plans, the general nonattainment area planning
requirements of title I, part D of the CAA are found in subpart 1, and
the Moderate area planning requirements specifically for PM are found
in subpart 4.
The EPA has a longstanding general guidance document that
interprets the 1990 amendments to the CAA, commonly referred to as the
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (``General Preamble'').\15\ The General Preamble
addresses the relationship between the subpart 1 and subpart 4
requirements and provides recommendations to states for meeting certain
statutory requirements for PM attainment plans. As explained in the
General Preamble, specific requirements applicable to Moderate area
attainment plan SIP submissions for the PM NAAQS are set forth in
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act, but such SIP submissions must
also meet the general attainment planning provisions in subpart 1 of
part D, title I of the Act, to the extent these provisions ``are not
otherwise subsumed by, or integrally related to,'' the more specific
subpart 4 requirements.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992).
\16\ Id. at 13538.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To implement the PM2.5 NAAQS, the EPA has also
promulgated the ``Fine Particle Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standard: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final Rule''
(hereinafter, the ``PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule'').\17\ The
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule establishes regulatory
requirements and provides additional guidance applicable to attainment
plan submissions for the PM2.5 NAAQS, including the 2006 24-
hour and 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at issue in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The general subpart 1 statutory requirements for attainment plans
include: (i) The section 172(c)(1) requirement for reasonably available
control measures (RACM)/reasonably available control technology (RACT)
and attainment demonstrations; (ii) the section 172(c)(2) requirement
to demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP); (iii) the section
172(c)(3) requirement for emissions inventories; (iv) the section
172(c)(5) requirement for a nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
permitting program; and (v) the section 172(c)(9) requirement for
contingency measures.
The more specific subpart 4 statutory requirements for Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment areas include: (i) The section
189(a)(1)(A) and 189(e) NNSR permit program requirements; (ii) the
section 189(a)(1)(B) requirement for attainment demonstrations; (iii)
the section 189(a)(1)(C) requirement for RACM; and (iv) the section
189(c) requirements for RFP and quantitative milestones. Under subpart
4, states with Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas must
provide for attainment in the area as expeditiously as practicable but
no later than the latest permissible attainment date under CAA section
188(c), i.e., December 31, 2021 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in
the South Coast.\18\ In addition, under subpart 4, direct
PM2.5 and all precursors to the formation of
PM2.5 are subject to control unless the EPA approves a
demonstration from the State establishing that a given precursor does
not contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
PM2.5 NAAQS in the area.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Generally, under CAA section 188(c), the latest permissible
attainment date for a Moderate nonattainment area is the end of the
sixth calendar year after the area's designation as nonattainment.
Because the EPA designated and classified the South Coast as a
Moderate nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
effective April 15, 2015 (80 FR 2206, 2215), the latest permissible
attainment date for these NAAQS in the South Coast is December 31,
2021.
\19\ 40 CFR 51.1006 and 51.1009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Completeness Review of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require each state to
provide reasonable public notice and an opportunity for a public
hearing prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision to
the EPA. To meet this requirement, every SIP submission should include
evidence that adequate public notice was given and an opportunity for a
public hearing was provided consistent with the EPA's implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
Both the District and CARB satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior
to adoption and
[[Page 40029]]
submission of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. The District conducted
numerous public workshops, provided public comment periods, and held a
public hearing prior to its adoption of the Plan on March 3, 2017.\20\
CARB also provided the required public notice and opportunity for
public comment prior to its March 23, 2017 public hearing and adoption
of the Plan.\21\ Each submission includes proof of publication of
notices for the respective public hearings, and transcripts for the
public hearings.\22\ We find, therefore, that the 2016 PM2.5
Plan meets the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearings
in CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ SCAQMD, Notice of Public Hearing, ``Proposed 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Quality Management
District and Report on the Health Impacts of Particulate Matter Air
Pollution in the South Coast Air Basin,'' December 14, 2016.
\21\ CARB, ``Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Adopting the
2016 Air Quality Management Plan for Ozone and PM2.5 for
the South Coast Air Basin and the Coachella Valley,'' March 6, 2017.
\22\ Memorandum dated March 6, 2017, from Denise Garzaro, Clerk
of the Board, SCAQMD, to Arlene Martinez, Administrative Secretary,
Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, Subject: ``SIP
Documentation, January 24, 2017; and California Air Resources Board,
Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Adopting the 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan for Ozone and PM2.5 for the South Coast
Air Basin and the Coachella Valley.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the EPA to determine whether a
SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section also
provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively determined to
be complete or incomplete will become complete by operation of law six
months after the date of submission. The EPA's SIP completeness
criteria are found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The 2016
PM2.5 Plan, which CARB submitted on April 27, 2017, became
complete by operation of law on October 27, 2017.
V. Review of the South Coast PM2.5 Plan
A. Emissions Inventory
1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that each SIP include a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the nonattainment
area. We refer to this inventory as the ``base year inventory.'' The
EPA has established regulatory requirements for base year and other
emissions inventories in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule
\23\ and issued guidance concerning emissions inventories for
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 40 CFR 51.1008.
\24\ 81 FR 58010, 58078-58079 and ``Emissions Inventory Guidance
for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA,
May 2017 (``Emissions Inventory Guidance''), available at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-emissions-inventory-guidance-implementation-ozone-and-particulate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The base year emissions inventory should provide a state's best
estimate of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant
pollutants in the area, i.e., all emissions that contribute to the
formation of a particular NAAQS pollutant. For the PM2.5
NAAQS, the base year emissions inventory must include direct
PM2.5 emissions, separately reported filterable and
condensable PM2.5 emissions,\25\ and emissions of all
chemical precursors to the formation of secondary PM2.5:
NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia.\26\ In addition, the
emissions inventory base year for a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area must be one of the three years for which monitored
data were used to designate the area as nonattainment, or another
technically appropriate year justified by the state in its Moderate
area SIP submission.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ The Emissions Inventory Guidance identifies the types of
sources for which the EPA expects states to provide condensable PM
emissions inventories. Emissions Inventory Guidance, section 4.2.1
(``Condensable PM Emissions''), 63-65.
\26\ 40 CFR 51.1008.
\27\ 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A state must include in its SIP submission documentation explaining
how the emissions data were calculated. In estimating mobile source
emissions, a state should use the latest emissions models and planning
assumptions available at the time it develops the SIP submission.
States are also required to use the EPA's ``Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors'' (AP-42) road dust method for calculating
re-entrained road dust emissions from paved roads.28 29 At
the time the 2016 PM2.5 Plan was developed, California was
required to use EMFAC2014 to estimate tailpipe and brake and tire wear
emissions of PM2.5, NOX, SO2, and VOC
from on-road mobile sources.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The EPA released an update to AP-42 in January 2011 that
revised the equation for estimating paved road dust emissions based
on an updated data regression that included new emissions tests
results. (76 FR 6328, February 4, 2011). CARB used the revised 2011
AP-42 methodology in developing on-road mobile source emissions; see
http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/fullpdf/full7-9_2016.pdf.
\29\ AP-42 has been published since 1972 as the primary source
of the EPA's emission factor information. It contains emission
factors and process information for more than 200 air pollution
source categories. A source category is a specific industry sector
or group of similar emitting sources. The emission factors have been
developed and compiled from source test data, material balance
studies, and engineering estimates.
\30\ The EMFAC model (short for EMission FACtor) is a computer
model developed by CARB. The EPA approved and announced the
availability of EMFAC2014 for use in SIP development and
transportation conformity in California on December 14, 2015 (80 FR
77337). The EPA's approval of the EMFAC2014 emissions model for SIP
and conformity purposes was effective on the date of publication in
the Federal Register. On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved and
announced the availability of EMFAC2017, the latest update to the
EMFAC model for use by state and local governments to meet CAA
requirements (84 FR 41717). EMFAC2017 was not available to the State
and District at the time they were developing the 2016
PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the base year inventory submitted to meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), a state must also submit future
``baseline inventories'' for the projected attainment year, each RFP
milestone year, and any other year of significance for meeting
applicable CAA requirements.\31\ By ``baseline inventories'' (referred
to in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as ``baseline inventories'' or
``future baseline inventories''), we mean projected emissions
inventories for future years that account for, among other things, the
ongoing effects of economic growth and adopted emission control
requirements. The SIP submission should include documentation to
explain how the state calculated the emissions projections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2) and 51.1012(a)(2); see also EPA,
``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations,'' May 2017, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-07/documents/ei_guidance_may_2017_final_rev.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Emissions Inventories in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The annual average planning inventories for direct PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors (NOX,
SOX,\32\ VOC, and ammonia) for the South Coast
PM2.5 nonattainment area, together with documentation for
the inventories, are found in Chapter 3, Appendix III, and Appendix V
of the Plan. Appendix V also contains additional inventory
documentation specific to the air quality modeling inventories. These
portions of the Plan contain annual average daily inventories of actual
emissions for the 2012 base year, and projected inventories for the
future 2019 RFP baseline year, the 2021 Moderate area attainment year,
and the 2022 post-attainment RFP year.\33\ The annual
[[Page 40030]]
average daily inventory is used to evaluate sources of emissions for
attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The 2016 PM2.5 Plan generally uses ``sulfur
oxides'' or ``SOX'' in reference to SO2 as a
precursor to the formation of PM2.5. We use
SOX and SO2 interchangeably throughout this
notice.
\33\ The 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes summer day
inventories for ozone planning purposes, and inventories for Serious
area planning purposes for both the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. The 2016 PM2.5 Plan therefore includes annual
average and summer day inventories for all years between 2017 and
2031, except 2029. 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III,
Attachment A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future emissions forecasts are primarily based on demographic and
economic growth projections provided by SCAG. Baseline inventories
reflect all District control measures adopted by December 2015 and CARB
rules adopted by November 2015. Growth factors used to project these
baseline inventories are derived mainly from data obtained from
SCAG.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Id. at III-2-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each emissions inventory is divided into two source
classifications: Stationary sources (i.e., point sources and area
sources) and mobile sources (i.e., on-road and non-road sources of
emissions). Point sources in the South Coast air basin that emit four
tons per year (tpy) or more of PM, NOX, SOX, or
VOC report annual emissions to the District. Point source emissions for
the 2012 base year emissions inventory are generally based on reported
data from facilities using the District's Annual Emissions Reporting
program.\35\ Area sources include smaller emission sources distributed
across the nonattainment area. CARB and the District estimate emissions
for about 400 area source categories using established inventory
methods, including publicly available emission factors and activity
information. Activity data may come from national survey data such as
from the Energy Information Administration or from local sources such
as the Southern California Gas Company, paint suppliers, and District
databases. Emission factors can be based on a number of sources
including source tests, compliance reports, and the EPA's AP-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Information about the SCAQMD's Annual Emissions Reporting
program is available at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/compliance/annual-emission-reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions inventories are constantly being revised and improved.
Between the finalization of the South Coast 2012 Air Quality Management
Plan (``2012 AQMP'') and the development of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan, the District improved and updated its emissions estimation
methodologies for liquified petroleum gas combustion sources, natural
gas combustion sources, Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM)
NOX emissions sources (based on 2015 program amendments),
livestock waste management operations, gasoline dispensing facilities,
composting operations, oil and gas production, and architectural
coatings.
On-road emissions inventories are calculated using CARB's EMFAC2014
model and the travel activity data provided by SCAG in ``The 2016-2040
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.'' \36\
Re-entrained paved road dust emissions are calculated using the EPA's
AP-42 road dust methodology.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ SCAG's ``The 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/
Sustainable Communities Strategy'' is available at http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx.
\37\ CARB, Miscellaneous Process Methodology 7.9 Entrained Road
Travel, Paved Road Dust, (Revised and updated, November 2016)
available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/fullpdf/full7-9_2016.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB provided emissions inventories for off-road equipment,
including construction and mining equipment, industrial and commercial
equipment, lawn and garden equipment, agricultural equipment, ocean-
going vessels, commercial harbor craft, locomotives, cargo handling
equipment, pleasure craft, and recreational vehicles. CARB uses several
models to estimate emissions for more than one hundred off-road
equipment categories.\38\ Aircraft emissions are developed in
conjunction with the airports in the region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, III-1-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 provides a summary of the District's 2012 base year annual
average emissions estimates for direct PM2.5 and all
PM2.5 precursors. These inventories provide the basis for
the control measure analysis and the RFP and impracticability
demonstrations in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. For a more detailed
discussion of the inventories, see Appendix III of the Plan.
Table 1--South Coast 2012 Base Year Emissions
[Annual average, tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct PM2.5
NOX SOX VOC Ammonia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Sources.............. 44 70 10 212 63
On-Road Mobile Sources.......... 14 317 2 158 18
Off-Road Mobile Sources......... 8 153 6 100 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 66 540 18 470 81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 3-2. Values may not be precise due to rounding.
Condensable Particulate Matter
The PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule states that ``[t]he
inventory shall include direct PM2.5 emissions, separately
reported PM2.5 filterable and condensable emissions, and
emissions of the scientific PM2.5 precursors, including
precursors that are not PM2.5 plan precursors pursuant to a
precursor demonstration under Sec. 51.1006.'' \39\ On June 15, 2018,
the SCAQMD submitted a technical supplement to the SIP containing
emissions estimates for both condensable and filterable
PM2.5 emissions from specified sources of direct
PM2.5 in the South Coast area.\40\ The supplement provides
filterable and condensable emissions estimates, expressed as annual
average PM2.5 emissions, for all of the identified source
categories for the 2012 base year, the 2019 RFP year, the 2021 Moderate
area attainment year, and the 2022 RFP year, as well as subsequent
years.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1)(iv).
\40\ Letter dated June 15, 2018, from Philip Fine, Deputy
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, EPA
Region IX, Subject: ``Condensable and Filterable Portions of
PM2.5 emissions in the 2016 AQMP.''
\41\ Id., Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan relies on several SIP-approved rules
that regulate direct PM emissions as part of the PM2.5
control strategy, including Rule 445 (``Wood-Burning Devices''), as
amended May 3, 2013; Rule 1138 (``Control of Emissions from Restaurant
Operations''), adopted November 14, 1997; and Rule 1155 (``Particulate
Matter (PM) Control Devices''), as amended May 2, 2014. As part of our
action on any rules that regulate direct PM2.5 emissions, we
evaluate the emission limits in the rule to ensure that they
appropriately address condensable PM, as required by 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(iv). We note that the SIP-
[[Page 40031]]
approved version of Rule 1138 requires testing according to the
District's protocol, which requires measurement of both condensable and
filterable PM in accordance with SCAQMD Test Method 5.1.\42\ We also
note that the SIP-approved version of Rule 1155 requires measurement of
both condensable and filterable PM in accordance with SCAQMD Test
Methods 5.1, 5.2, or 5.3 as applicable.43 44
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Rule 1138 (adopted November 14, 1997), paragraph (c)(1) and
(g), SCAQMD Protocol paragraph 3.1, and SCAQMD Protocol,
``Determination of Particulate and Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Restaurant Operations,'' November 14, 1997 (available
at https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490-0068&contentType=pdf). The EPA approved Rule 1138 into
the SIP on July 11, 2011 (66 FR 36170).
\43\ Rule 1155 (as amended May 2, 2014), paragraph (e)(6). The
EPA approved Rule 1155 into the SIP on March 16, 2015 (80 FR 13495).
\44\ SCAQMD Test Method 5.1, ``Determination of Particulate
Matter Emissions from Stationary Sources Using a Wet Impingement
Train,'' March 1989; SCAQMD Test Method 5.2, ``Determination of
Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary Sources Using Heated
Probe and Filter,'' March 1989; and SCAQMD Test Method 5.3,
``Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary
Sources Using an in-Stack Filter,'' October 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
The emissions inventories in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan were
made available to the public for comment and were subject to public
hearing at both the District and State levels.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ SCAQMD Board Resolution 17-2, 3 and CARB Resolution 17-8,
4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The inventories in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan are based on the
most current and accurate information available to the State and
District at the time the Plan and its inventories were being developed,
including the latest EPA-approved version of California's mobile source
emissions model that was available to the State and District at the
time they were developing the Plan, EMFAC2014, and the EPA's most
recent AP-42 methodology for paved road dust.\46\ The inventories
comprehensively address all source categories in the South Coast and
were developed consistent with the EPA's regulations and inventory
guidance. In accordance with 40 CFR 51.1008(a), the 2012 base year is
one of the three years for which monitored data were used for
designating the area, and it represents actual annual average emissions
of all sources within the nonattainment area. Direct PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors are included in the inventories,
and filterable and condensable direct PM2.5 emissions are
identified separately. For these reasons, we are proposing to approve
the 2012 base year emissions inventory in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR
51.1008. We are also proposing to find that the future year baseline
inventories in the Plan satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2) and 51.1012(a)(2) and provide an adequate basis for the
RACM, RFP, and impracticability demonstrations in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ SCAG's on-road emissions inventory includes power take off
(PTO) as part of the heavy-duty truck category, whereas CARB's motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) includes PTO as a standalone
vehicle category. See email dated July 9, 2019, from Nesamani
Kalandiyur, CARB, to Karina O'Connor, EPA. As a result, SCAG's on-
road emissions estimates used in the air quality modeling are
slightly lower than CARB's MVEBs and the modeled air quality
concentrations in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan are biased slightly
low. Thus, the modeled concentrations are conservative and
consistent with the District's conclusion that attainment by the
Moderate area attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable.
\47\ The baseline emissions projections in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan assume implementation of CARB's Zero Emissions
Vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate and greenhouse gas (GHG) standards,
based on the approved EMFAC2014 model and assumptions that were
available at the time of the SIP's development. On September 27,
2019, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the EPA (the
Agencies) issued a notice of final rulemaking for the Safer
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One
National Program (SAFE I) that, among other things, withdrew the
EPA's 2013 waiver of preemption of CARB's ZEV sales mandate and
vehicle GHG standards. 84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019). See also
proposed SAFE rule at 83 FR 42986 (August 24, 2018). In response to
SAFE I, CARB developed EMFAC off-model adjustment factors to account
for anticipated changes in on-road emissions. On March 12, 2020, the
EPA informed CARB that the EPA considers these adjustment factors to
be acceptable for future use. See letter dated March 12, 2020 from
Elizabeth J. Adams, EPA Region IX, to Steven Cliff, CARB. On April
30, 2020 (85 FR 24174), the Agencies issued a notice of final
rulemaking titled: The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE)
Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light
Trucks (SAFE II), establishing the federal fuel economy and GHG
vehicle emissions standards based on the August 2018 SAFE proposal.
The effect of both SAFE final rules (SAFE I and SAFE II) on the on-
road vehicle mix in the South Coast nonattainment area and on the
resulting vehicular emissions is expected to be minimal during the
timeframe addressed in this SIP revision. Therefore, we anticipate
the SAFE final rules would not materially change the demonstration
that it is impracticable for the South Coast 2012 PM2.5
Moderate area to attain by the Moderate area attainment date of
December 31, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. PM2.5 Precursors
1. Requirements for the Control of PM2.5 Precursors
The provisions of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the CAA do not
define the term ``precursor'' for purposes of PM2.5, nor do
they explicitly require the control of any specifically identified PM
precursor. The statutory definition of ``air pollutant'' in CAA section
302(g), however, provides that the term ``includes any precursors to
the formation of any air pollutant, to the extent the Administrator has
identified such precursor or precursors for the particular purpose for
which the term `air pollutant' is used.'' The EPA has identified
NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia as precursors to the
formation of PM2.5. Accordingly, the attainment plan
requirements of subpart 4 apply to emissions of all four precursor
pollutants and direct PM2.5 from all types of stationary,
area, and mobile sources, except as otherwise provided in the Act
(e.g., in CAA section 189(e)).
Section 189(e) of the Act requires that the control requirements
for major stationary sources of direct PM10 (which includes
PM2.5) also apply to major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors, except where the Administrator determines
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM10
levels that exceed the standard in the area. Section 189(e) contains
the only express exception to the control requirements under subpart 4
(e.g., requirements for RACM, RACT, best available control measures
(BACM) and best available control technology (BACT), most stringent
measures (MSM), and new source review (NSR)) for sources of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions. Although
section 189(e) explicitly addresses only major stationary sources, the
EPA interprets the Act as authorizing it also to determine, under
appropriate circumstances, that regulation of specific PM2.5
precursors from other source categories in a given nonattainment area
is not necessary. For example, under the EPA's longstanding
interpretation of the control requirements that apply to stationary and
mobile sources of PM10 precursors in the nonattainment area
under CAA section 172(c)(1) and subpart 4,\48\ a state may demonstrate
in a SIP submission that control of a certain precursor pollutant is
not necessary in light of its insignificant contribution to ambient
PM10 levels in the nonattainment area.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ General Preamble, 13539-13542.
\49\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of
subpart 4 for PM10. See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated
Residents v. EPA, et al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, a state may elect
to submit to the EPA a ``comprehensive precursor demonstration'' for a
specific nonattainment area to show that emissions of a particular
precursor from all existing sources located in the nonattainment area
do not contribute
[[Page 40032]]
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the standard in
the area.\50\ If the EPA determines that the contribution of the
precursor to PM2.5 levels in the area is not significant and
approves the demonstration, the state is not required to control
emissions of the relevant precursor from existing sources in the
attainment plan.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(1).
\51\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are evaluating the 2016 PM2.5 Plan in accordance with
the presumption embodied within subpart 4 that all PM2.5
precursors must be addressed in the State's evaluation of potential
control measures, unless the State adequately demonstrates that
emissions of a particular precursor or precursors do not contribute
significantly to ambient PM2.5 levels that exceed the
PM2.5 NAAQS in the nonattainment area. In reviewing any
determination by the State to exclude a PM2.5 precursor from
the required evaluation of potential control measures, we consider both
the magnitude of the precursor's contribution to ambient
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area and the
sensitivity of ambient PM2.5 concentrations in the area to
reductions in emissions of that precursor.
2. Control of PM2.5 Precursors in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan discusses the five primary
pollutants that contribute to the mass of the ambient aerosol (i.e.,
directly emitted PM2.5, NOX, SOX, VOC,
and ammonia), and states that various combinations of reductions in
these pollutants could all provide a path to clean air.\52\ The Plan
assesses and presents the relative value of each ton of precursor
emission reductions, considering the resulting ambient improvements in
PM2.5 air quality expressed in micrograms per cubic
meter.\53\ As presented in the weight of evidence discussion, trends in
PM2.5 and NOX emissions suggest a direct response
between lower emissions and improved air quality. The Community
Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model simulations in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan provide a set of response factors for direct
PM2.5, NOX, SOX, and VOCs, based on
improvements to ambient PM2.5 levels resulting from
reductions of each pollutant. The contribution of ammonia emissions is
embedded as a component of the NOX and SOX
factors because ammonium nitrate and ammonium sulfate are the resultant
particulate species formed in the atmosphere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, VI-F-1 and V-6-61.
\53\ Id. at VI-A-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan describes how reductions in
NOX, SOX, VOC, and ammonia emissions contribute
to attainment of the PM2.5 standard in the South Coast area
and contains the District's evaluation of available control measures
for all four of these PM2.5 precursor pollutants, in
addition to direct PM2.5, consistent with the regulatory
presumptions under subpart 4. The 2016 PM2.5 Plan also
contains a discussion of the control requirements applicable to major
stationary sources under CAA section 189(e).\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Id., Appendix VI-F. In a separate rulemaking to approve
revisions to SCAQMD's NNSR program, the EPA determined that the
control requirements applicable under the SCAQMD SIP to major
stationary sources of direct PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of NOX, SOX, and VOC, and
that major stationary sources of ammonia do not contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
PM2.5 standards in the area. (80 FR 24821, May 1, 2015).
This rulemaking addressed the control requirements of CAA section
189(e) only for NNSR purposes and not for attainment planning
purposes under subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
Based on a review of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and other information available to the EPA, we
agree with the State's conclusion that all four chemical precursors to
the formation of PM2.5 must be regulated for purposes of
attaining the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area. We
discuss the State's evaluation of potential control measures for direct
PM2.5, NOX, SOX, VOC, and ammonia in
section V.D.
C. Air Quality Modeling
1. Requirements for Air Quality Modeling
Section 189(a)(1)(B) of the CAA requires each state in which a
Moderate area is located to submit a plan that includes a demonstration
(including air quality modeling) either (i) that the plan will provide
for attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date, or (ii) that attainment by that date is impracticable.
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes a demonstration that attainment
by the Moderate attainment date is impracticable.
The EPA's PM2.5 modeling guidance \55\ (``Modeling
Guidance'' and ``Modeling Guidance Update'') recommends that a
photochemical model, such as the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with
Extensions (CAMx) or Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ), be
used to simulate a base case, with meteorological and emissions inputs
reflecting a base case year, to replicate concentrations monitored in
that year. The model application to the base year undergoes a
performance evaluation to ensure that it satisfactorily corroborates
the concentrations monitored in that year. The model may then be used
to simulate emissions occurring in other years required for a plan,
namely the base year (which may differ from the base case year) and
future year.\56\ The modeled response to the emission changes between
those years is used to calculate relative response factors (RRFs) that
are applied to the design value in the base year to estimate the
projected design value in the future year for comparison against the
NAAQS. Separate RRFs are estimated for each chemical species component
of PM2.5, and for each quarter of the year, to reflect their
differing responses to seasonal meteorological conditions and
emissions. Because each species is handled separately, before applying
an RRF, the base year design value must be speciated using available
chemical species measurements--that is, each day's measured
PM2.5 design value must be split into its species
components. The Modeling Guidance provides additional detail on the
recommended approach.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ Memorandum dated November 29, 2018, from Richard Wayland,
Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, EPA, to Regional Air Division Directors, EPA, Subject:
``Modeling Guidance for Demonstrating Air Quality Goals for Ozone,
PM2.5, and Regional Haze,'' (``Modeling Guidance''), and
Memorandum dated June 28, 2011 from Tyler Fox, Air Quality Modeling
Group, OAQPS, EPA, to Regional Air Program Managers, EPA, Subject:
``Update to the 24 Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Modeled Attainment
Test,'' (``Modeling Guidance Update'').
\56\ In this section, we use the terms ``base case,'' ``base
year'' or ``baseline,'' and ``future year'' as described in section
2.3 of the EPA's Modeling Guidance. The ``base case'' modeling
simulates measured concentrations for a given time period, using
emissions and meteorology for that same year. The modeling ``base
year'' (which can be the same as the base case year) is the
emissions starting point for the plan and for projections to the
future year, both of which are modeled for the attainment
demonstration. Modeling Guidance, 37-38. Note that CARB sometimes
uses ``base year'' synonymously with ``base case'' and ``reference
year'' instead of ``base year.''
\57\ Modeling Guidance, section 4.4, ``What is the Modeled
Attainment Tests for the Annual Average PM2.5 NAAQS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has not issued modeling guidance specific to
impracticability demonstrations but believes that a state seeking to
make such a demonstration generally should provide air quality modeling
similar to that required for an attainment demonstration.\58\ The main
difference is that for an impracticability demonstration, the
implementation of the SIP control strategy (including
[[Page 40033]]
RACM) does not result in attainment of the standard by the Moderate
area attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 81 FR 58010, 58048.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For an attainment demonstration, a thorough review of all modeling
inputs and assumptions (including consistency with EPA guidance) is
especially important because the modeling must ultimately support a
conclusion that the plan (including its control strategy) will provide
for timely attainment of the applicable NAAQS. In contrast, for an
impracticability demonstration, the end point is a reclassification to
Serious, which triggers the requirement for a new Serious area
attainment plan with a new air quality modeling analysis, and a new
control strategy.\59\ Thus, the Serious area planning process would
provide an opportunity to refine the modeling analysis and/or correct
any technical shortcomings in the impracticability demonstration.
Therefore, the burden of proof will generally be lower for an
impracticability demonstration compared to an attainment
demonstration.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ CAA section 189(b)(1).
\60\ 81 FR 58010, 58049.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Air Quality Modeling in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
Air quality modeling is discussed in Chapter 5 and Appendix V of
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. A brief description of the modeling and
our evaluation of it follows. More detailed information about the
modeling in the Plan is available in section III of our technical
support document (TSD) for this proposed action.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ EPA, Region IX, Air Division, ``Technical Support Document,
Proposed Action on the South Coast Moderate Area State
Implementation Plan and Proposed Reclassification as Serious
Nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard,'' April 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual PM2.5 Modeling Approach
The District conducted CMAQ \62\ simulations for each day in the
2012 base year. It generated site- and species-specific RRFs for the
ammonium ion, nitrate ion, sulfate ion, organic carbon, elemental
carbon, sea salt, and a combined grouping of other primary
PM2.5 material for each future year simulation, and
calculated future year design values by multiplying the species- and
site-specific RRFs by the corresponding quarterly mean component
concentration. The District summed the quarterly mean components to
determine quarterly mean PM2.5 concentrations, which it
subsequently averaged to determine the annual design values. The future
year design values reflect the weighted quarterly average concentration
from the projections of five years of data. The District projected
future year annual PM2.5 design values for the 2021 Moderate
area attainment year and the 2025 Serious area attainment year, for the
2012 PM2.5 standard of 12 [micro]g/m\3\.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ CMAQ Version 5.0.2.
\63\ The District also projected future year annual
PM2.5 design values for 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future Air Quality
Simulations of 2021 baseline emissions (no additional controls) and
2021 control emissions were conducted to assess future annual
PM2.5 levels in the South Coast air basin. The 2021 baseline
simulation used emission levels projected from the 2012 base year that
reflect all adopted control measures to be implemented by December 31,
2021. The 2021 control simulation reflects the effects of the control
strategy on future PM2.5 design values. Simulations of both
the 2021 baseline and 2021 control emissions indicate that the 2012
annual PM2.5 standard will not be met in the South Coast in
2021, even when all controls for direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors are implemented. The projected 2021 control
scenario design value is 12.3 [micro]g/m\3\ at Mira Loma, which is
typically the monitoring site that records the highest PM2.5
levels in the South Coast air basin.
Table 2 shows future annual PM2.5 air quality
projections at the Mira Loma monitoring site and the four other
PM2.5 monitoring sites equipped with comprehensive
particulate species characterization. Shown in the table are the base
year design values for 2012 along with projections for 2021.
Table 2--Future Annual PM2.5 Air Quality Projections at Selected
Monitoring Sites in the South Coast Air Basin
[[micro]g/m\3\]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021
Monitoring site location 2012 Control
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anaheim............................................... 10.6 9.1
Fontana............................................... 12.6 10.4
Los Angeles........................................... 12.4 10.6
Mira Loma............................................. 14.9 12.3
Rubidoux.............................................. 13.2 10.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 5-5 and Table V-6-6.
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Conclusion
The EPA evaluated the District's choice of model for the
impracticability demonstration and the extensive discussion in the Plan
about modeling procedures, tests, and performance analyses. We find the
District's analyses consistent with EPA guidance on modeling for
PM2.5 attainment planning purposes. Based on these reviews,
we find that the modeling in the Plan is adequate for the purposes of
supporting the RFP demonstration and the demonstration of
impracticability in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
D. Reasonably Available Control Measures and Control Strategy
1. Requirements for RACM/RACT and Control Strategies
The general subpart 1 attainment plan requirement for RACM/RACT is
described in CAA section 172(c)(1), which requires that attainment plan
submissions ``provide for the implementation of all reasonably
available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including
such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may
be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available
control technology)'' and provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
The attainment planning requirements specific to PM2.5
under subpart 4 likewise impose upon states with nonattainment areas
classified as Moderate an obligation to develop attainment plans that
require RACM/RACT on sources of direct PM2.5 and all
PM2.5 plan precursors. CAA section 189(a)(1)(C) requires
that Moderate area PM2.5 SIPs contain provisions to assure
that RACM/RACT are implemented no later than four years after
designation of the area. The EPA reads CAA section 172(c)(1) and
189(a)(1)(C) together to require that attainment plans for Moderate
nonattainment areas provide for the implementation of RACM/RACT for
existing sources of PM2.5 and those PM2.5
precursors subject to control in the nonattainment area as
expeditiously as practicable but no later than four years after
designation.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ This interpretation is consistent with guidance provided in
the General Preamble, 13540.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule defines RACM as ``any
technologically and economically feasible measure that can be
implemented in whole or in part within 4 years after the effective date
of designation of a PM2.5 nonattainment area and that
achieves permanent and enforceable reductions in direct
PM2.5 emissions and/or PM2.5 plan precursor
emissions from sources in the area. RACM includes reasonably available
control technology (RACT).'' \65\ The EPA has historically defined RACT
as the lowest emission limitation that a particular stationary source
is capable of meeting by the application of control
[[Page 40034]]
technology (e.g., devices, systems, process modifications, or other
apparatus or techniques that reduce air pollution) that is reasonably
available considering technological and economic feasibility.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ 81 FR 58010, 58035.
\66\ General Preamble, 13541, and 57 FR 18070, 18073-18074.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, those control
measures that otherwise meet the definition of RACM but ``can only be
implemented in whole or in part during the period beginning 4 years
after the effective date of designation of a nonattainment area and no
later than the end of the sixth calendar year following the effective
date of designation of the area'' must be adopted and implemented as
``additional reasonable measures.'' \67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ 40 CFR 51.1000, 51.1009(a)(4)(i)(B), and
51.1009(a)(4)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States must provide written justification in a SIP submission for
eliminating potential control options from further review on the basis
of technological or economic infeasibility.\68\ An evaluation of
technological feasibility may include consideration of factors such as
a source's process and operating conditions, raw materials, physical
plant layout, and non-air quality and energy impacts (e.g., increased
water pollution, waste disposal, and energy requirements).\69\ An
evaluation of economic feasibility may include consideration of factors
such as cost per ton of pollution reduced (cost-effectiveness), capital
costs, and operating and maintenance costs.\70\ Absent other
indications, the EPA presumes that it is reasonable for similar sources
to bear similar costs of emission reductions. Economic feasibility of
RACM/RACT is thus largely informed by evidence that other sources in a
source category have in fact applied the control technology, process
change, or measure in question in similar circumstances.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ 40 CFR 51.1009(a)(3).
\69\ 40 CFR 51.1009(a)(3); see also 57 FR 18070, 18073-18074.
\70\ Id.
\71\ 57 FR 18070, 18074.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with these requirements, SCAQMD must implement RACM,
including RACT, for direct PM2.5 emission sources no later
than April 15, 2019, and must implement additional reasonable measures
for these sources no later than December 31, 2021.
The CAA allows for approval of enforceable commitments that are
limited in scope where circumstances exist that warrant the use of such
commitments in place of adopted measures.\72\ Specifically, section
110(a)(2)(A) of the CAA 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 requirements of
the Act.'' Section 172(c)(6) of the Act, which applies to nonattainment
area SIPs, is virtually identical to section 110(a)(2)(A).\73\
Commitments approved by the EPA under CAA section 110(k)(3) are
enforceable by the EPA and citizens under CAA sections 113 and 304,
respectively. Additionally, if a state fails to meet its commitments,
the EPA may make a finding of failure to implement the SIP under CAA
section 179(a)(4), which starts an 18-month period for the state to
correct the non-implementation before mandatory sanctions are imposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ In the past, the 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 par, 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).
\73\ The language in sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) is
quite broad, allowing a SIP to contain any enforceable ``means or
techniques'' that the 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 be in place when a SIP is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the EPA determines that circumstances warrant consideration of
an enforceable commitment to satisfy a CAA requirement, it considers
three factors in determining whether to approve the enforceable
commitment: (a) Does the commitment address a limited portion of the
CAA requirement; (b) is the state capable of fulfilling its commitment;
and (c) is the commitment for a reasonable and appropriate period of
time.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the EPA's
interpretation of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) and the
Agency's use and application of the three-factor test in approving
enforceable commitments in the 1-hour ozone SIP for Houston-
Galveston. BCCA Appeal Group et al. v. EPA et al., 355 F.3d 817 (5th
Cir. 2003). More recently, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld
the EPA's approval of enforceable commitments in ozone and
PM2.5 SIPs for the San Joaquin Valley, based on the same
three factor test. Committee for a Better Arvin, et al. v. EPA, 786
F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Control Strategy in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
For purposes of evaluating the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, we have
divided the measures relied on to satisfy the applicable control
requirements into two categories: Baseline measures and control
strategy measures.
As the term is used here, baseline measures are federal, State, and
District rules and regulations adopted prior to December 2015 for
District rules, and prior to November 2015 for CARB rules (i.e., prior
to the development of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan) that continue to
achieve emission reductions through the Moderate area attainment year
of 2021 and beyond.\75\ The Plan describes many of these measures in
Chapter 4, Appendix III, Appendix IV-B, Appendix IV-C, and Appendix
VI.\76\ Reductions from these baseline measures are incorporated into
the baseline inventory and reductions from the District measures in the
plan are individually quantified in Appendix III, Table III-2-2B.
According to the Plan, baseline measures provide most of the emission
reductions projected to occur between the 2012 base year and the 2022
post-attainment milestone year.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ These measures are typically rules that have compliance
dates occuring after the adoption date of a plan and mobile source
measures that achieve reductions as older engines are replaced
through attrition (e.g., through fleet turnover).
\76\ See also, email dated September 12, 2019 from Kalam Cheung,
SCAQMD, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX, attaching spreadsheet
entitled ``Draft Rule Adoption since 2016 AQMP 20190809.xlsx.''
\77\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4 and Appendix V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control strategy measures are the new rules, rule revisions,
commitments, and other measures that provide the additional increment
of emission reductions needed beyond the baseline measures to provide
for attainment, to demonstrate RFP, to meet the RACM/RACT requirement,
or to provide for contingency measures. Beyond the reductions from the
Plan's baseline measures as discussed above, the remaining reductions
needed for RFP and attainment \78\ are to be achieved through the
District's enforceable commitments to achieve emission reductions in
the South Coast nonattainment area. The Plan identifies the control
measures that are expected to achieve those emission reductions,
several of which are identified as ``additional reasonable measures''
because they are to be implemented
[[Page 40035]]
after the RACM deadline (i.e., after the four-year period following
designation but before the Moderate area attainment date). Below we
discuss the District's RACM/RACT evaluation, additional reasonable
measures identified in the plan, and the District's commitments to
achieve emission reductions through new control measures to attain the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2025 Serious area
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ The 2016 PM2.5 Plan contains a demonstration
that attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December
31, 2021 Moderate area attainment date is impracticable and
identifies December 31, 2025 as the most expeditious date by which
the South Coast area can attain this standard. 2016 PM2.5
Plan, Chapter 5 and Appendix V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. RACM/RACT Analysis in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan's RACM/RACT evaluation for direct
PM2.5, NOX, SOX, VOC, and ammonia
sources is presented in Appendix VI. The District, CARB, and SCAG, the
local metropolitan planning organization (MPO), each undertook a
process to identify and evaluate potential measures that could
contribute to expeditious attainment of the 2012 PM2.5
standard in the South Coast nonattainment area. We describe each of
these processes below.
i. The District's RACM Analysis
The District's RACM demonstration for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS focuses on stationary and area source controls and is described
in Appendix VI-A of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
In the years prior to the adoption of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan, the District developed and implemented comprehensive plans (e.g.,
the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan) to provide for attainment of the
PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS. These plans have resulted in the
District's adoption of many new rules and amendments to existing rules
for stationary and area sources. In addition, although the District
does not have authority to directly regulate emissions from mobile
sources, the District has implemented control strategies to indirectly
reduce emissions from mobile sources. These regulations and strategies
have yielded significant emission reductions from sources under the
District's jurisdiction.
In the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, the District conducted a multi-
step process to identify additional candidate RACM measures that are
technologically and economically feasible. As a first step in the RACM
analysis, the District developed a detailed emissions inventory of the
sources of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. An
up-to-date and comprehensive emissions inventory is essential to
develop control measures that effectively reduce air pollution. Details
on the methodology and development of the emissions inventory are
discussed in Chapter 3 and Appendix III of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan. A total of 75 major source categories are included in the base
year emissions inventory.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on these inventories, the District identified several source
categories as key emission sources in the South Coast nonattainment
area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, including consumer products,
livestock wastes, and numerous mobile source categories.\80\ For the
key stationary source categories under SCAQMD's jurisdiction, the
District compared existing control measures with requirements in
federal and state regulations and guidance, as well as with analogous
rules in other air districts to identify potential control measures.
Furthermore, to demonstrate that the SCAQMD considered all additional
candidate measures that are available and technologically and
economically feasible, the District conducted the following seven-step
analysis:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ Id., Table VI-A-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Held an Air Quality Technology Symposium to solicit new ideas
for feasible control measures in the South Coast air basin;
(2) conducted a RACT analysis to identify SCAQMD rules that are
less stringent than the EPA control technique guidelines (CTGs) or
analogous rules in other air districts;
(3) reviewed EPA technical support documents for previously
adopted/amended rules submitted for approval into the California SIP;
(4) reviewed control measures adopted during 2012-2015 in other
areas (i.e., Ventura County, San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin
Valley, Sacramento Metropolitan, Dallas Fort-Worth, Houston-Galveston-
Brazoria, New York, and New Jersey) to evaluate whether control
technologies deemed available and cost-effective in those areas would
be feasible for use in the South Coast air basin;
(5) reevaluated control measures that the District had found to be
technologically or economically infeasible as part of the RACM analysis
for the 2012 AQMP;
(6) reviewed the EPA's Menu of Control Measures (MCM); \81\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ EPA, Menu of Control Measures,
http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pdfs/MenuOfControlMeasures.pdf, as
of December 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) reviewed the EPA's March 2013 ``Strategies for Reducing Wood
Smoke'' guidance document to identify regulatory options for reducing
residential wood smoke.
Based on its RACM/RACT evaluation for stationary and area sources
under its jurisdiction as described above, the District found that its
current rules and regulations are generally equivalent to, or more
stringent than, those developed by other air districts with respect to
emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors.\82\ The
District identified a list of potential control measures for reducing
emissions further,\83\ and evaluated these potential additional control
measures to determine whether implementation of the measures would be
technologically and economically feasible in the South Coast. In
addition, the District considered other available control options that
can only be implemented after the four-year deadline for RACM/RACT, but
before the end of the sixth calendar year following designation, i.e.,
additional reasonable measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, VI-A-36 to VI-A-37.
\83\ Id., Table VI-A-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District identified four additional control measures with
quantifiable emission reductions to be implemented for the purpose of
meeting the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The Plan contains a commitment
by the District to adopt and implement these or substitute measures as
additional reasonable measures in 2020.\84\ We discuss the District's
commitment in further detail in section V.D.2.b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9, and 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7 and Table 4-8
(identifying BCM-04, BCM-10, CMB-02 and CMB-03 as new control
measures to be implemented by 2020 for PM2.5 purposes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District has also included new commitments in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan to achieve specific amounts of emission
reductions from NOX and ammonia sources in the South Coast
area. Specifically, the District has committed to adopt and submit
measures that will achieve 2.5 tons per day (tpd) of reductions in
NOX emissions and 0.3 tpd of reductions in ammonia emissions
by 2020, and 20.5 tpd of reductions in NOX emissions by
2022, as part of the control strategy for attaining the
PM2.5 NAAQS by 2025.\85\ The District expects
[[Page 40036]]
to meet these emission reduction commitments by adopting new control
measures and programs and strengthening existing control measures, such
as those identified in Table 4-7 and Table 4-8 of the Plan and in a
supplemental update to the control strategy submitted September 12,
2019 (``Control Strategy Updates'').\86\ More information about the
District's enforceable commitments and the specific control measures
anticipated to meet them is included in section V.D.2.c of this
proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9; 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-8; and email dated
September 12, 2019 from Kalam Cheung, SCAQMD, to Ashley Graham, EPA
Region IX, attaching spreadsheet entitled ``Draft Rule Adoption
since 2016 AQMP 20190809.xlsx'' (``Control Strategy Updates'').
Table 4-8 of the Plan identifies 5.8 tpd of NOX
reductions to be achieved by 2022 but is supplemented by the Control
Strategy Updates, which identify 20.5 tpd of NOX
reductions to be achieved by 2022 as part of the District's
aggregate tonnage commitment. Control Strategy Updates, ``Summary''
tab (``South Coast AQMD Reasonable Further Progress for 2012 Annual
PM2.5 Standard''). Table 4-8 of the Plan also identifies
0.3 tpd ammonia reductions and 28 tpd NOX reductions to
be achieved for purposes of attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS by
2025 and 3.3 tpd PM2.5 reductions to be achieved for
contingency measure purposes in 2025.
\86\ Control Strategy Updates, ``Summary'' tab (``South Coast
AQMD Reasonable Further Progress for 2012 Annual PM2.5
Standard'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We provide below an evaluation of several State and District
measures for key stationary and area source categories. We provide a
more detailed evaluation of the District's regulations in our TSD,\87\
together with recommendations for future improvements to these rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ EPA, Region IX, Air Division, ``Technical Support Document,
Proposed Action on the South Coast Moderate Area State
Implementation Plan and Proposed Reclassification as Serious
Nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard,'' April 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. State and District Measures for Stationary and Area Sources
Consumer Products
CARB and the SCAQMD both have well-established programs to regulate
VOC emissions from consumer products used by both household and
institutional consumers, including detergents; cleaning compounds;
polishes; floor finishes; cosmetics; personal care products; home,
lawn, and garden products; disinfectants; sanitizers; aerosol paints;
and automotive specialty products. Specifically, CARB has adopted three
regulations that establish VOC and reactivity limits for 129 consumer
product categories.\88\ The first regulation (Article 1) covers the
categories of antiperspirants and deodorants. The second regulation
(Article 2) covers numerous categories and is simply called the
``General Consumer Products Regulation.'' The third regulation (Article
3) covers categories of aerosol coatings. The EPA approved amendments
to these regulations into the California SIP on October 17, 2014.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ These regulations are codified in the California Code of
Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5--
Consumer Products; Article 2--Consumer Products.
\89\ 79 FR 62346.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SCAQMD also regulates certain categories of consumer products,
including architectural coatings, wood products, solvents and
degreasers, consumer paint thinners, and inks.\90\ As an example, we
discuss South Coast's implementation of Rule 1113 (``Architectural
Coatings'') below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ See, e.g., South Coast Rule 1107 (``Coating of Metal Parts
and Products''), approved into the SIP on November 24, 2008 (73 FR
70883); South Coast Rule 1122 (``Solvent Degreasers''), approved
into the SIP on February 8, 2006 (71 FR 6350); and South Coast Rule
1130 (``Graphic Arts''), approved into the SIP on July 14, 2015 (80
FR 40915).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information about these programs in
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, we agree with the State's and
District's conclusion that these SIP-approved regulations implement
RACM for the control of VOCs from consumer products.
Architectural Coatings
SCAQMD Rule 1113 (``Architectural Coatings''), amended February 5,
2016, establishes VOC content limits for paints and other architectural
coating products and establishes workplace standards for architectural
coating operations. The EPA approved Rule 1113, as amended, into the
California SIP on November 29, 2018.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ 83 FR 61326.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, the District compared the
requirements of Rule 1113, as amended September 6, 2013,\92\ to
analogous requirements implemented in other California air districts
between 2000 and 2015. The District's evaluation included the
requirements of Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District's Rule 442, as amended September 24, 2015. Based on this
evaluation, the District concluded that Rule 1113, as amended September
6, 2013, is generally equivalent to the requirements in other air
districts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ The EPA approved Rule 1113, as amended June 3, 2011, into
the SIP on March 26, 2013. 78 FR 18244. Since then, the EPA has
approved a more stringent version of Rule 1113, as amended February
5, 2016, into the SIP. 83 FR 61326 (November 29, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District's February 5, 2016 amendment to Rule 1113 strengthened
the rule by eliminating its exemption for small containers. According
to a SCAQMD staff report, the small container exemption represented one
percent of sales and an estimated twenty percent of total VOC
emissions.\93\ According to this report, the 2016 rule revision was
expected to achieve an estimated VOC reduction of 0.88 tpd by January
1, 2019. The EPA approved this amended rule into the California SIP on
November 29, 2018.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ SCAQMD Final Staff Report, ``Proposed Amended Rule 1113--
Architectural Coatings,'' February 2016, 22.
\94\ 83 FR 61326.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and additional information obtained during our
review of the Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
1113 implements RACM for the control of VOCs from architectural
coatings.
Confined Animal Facilities and Livestock Waste
SCAQMD Rule 1127 (``Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste''),
adopted August 6, 2004, and Rule 223 (``Emission Reduction Permits for
Large Confined Animal Facilities''), adopted June 2, 2006, together
establish requirements to reduce emissions of ammonia, VOCs, and other
pollutants emitted from confined animal facilities and related
operations. The EPA approved Rule 1127 and Rule 223 into the California
SIP on May 23, 2013 and July 13, 2015, respectively.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ 78 FR 30768 (May 23, 2013) and 80 FR 39966 (July 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1127 applies to dairy farms with 50 or more cows, heifers,
and/or calves and to manure processing operations, such as composting
operations and anaerobic digesters. The rule requires operators of
dairy farms and manure processing operations to use specified best
management practices to reduce pollutant emissions during the removal
and disposal of manure from corrals, among other things. Rule 223
applies to large confined animal facilities (LCAFs) and prohibits
owners/operators of such facilities from building, altering, replacing,
or operating an LCAF without first obtaining a permit from the
District. The permit application must include, among other things, an
emissions mitigation plan that identifies the mitigation measures to be
implemented at the facility. For each source category covered by the
rule, owners/operators must implement a prescribed number of mitigation
measures among a list of options or as approved by the District, CARB,
and the EPA.
The District compared the key requirements of Rule 1127 and Rule
223 to analogous requirements implemented in other parts of California
and in Idaho. Based on this evaluation, the District concludes that
Rule 1127 and Rule 223 together establish requirements for confined
animal facilities and related operations that are generally equivalent
to the requirements in these other areas. The District also considered
several additional control methods to further reduce ammonia emissions
from livestock waste, including application of acidifiers (sodium
bisulfate), dietary manipulation, feed additives, manure slurry
injection, and microbial/manure additives. The 2016 PM2.5
Plan contains a commitment by the District to adopt
[[Page 40037]]
an ammonia control measure for livestock waste in 2019.\96\ The
proposed measure is identified in the Plan as BCM-04.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9 and 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7.
\97\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7 and IV-A-202 to IV-A-
209 (describing BCM-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
1127 and Rule 223 together implement RACM for the control of ammonia
and VOCs from confined animal facilities and related operations.
Residential Wood-Burning Devices
SCAQMD Rule 445 (``Wood-Burning Devices''), amended May 3, 2013,
establishes requirements for the sale, operation, and installation of
wood-burning devices within the South Coast air basin that are designed
to reduce PM emissions from such devices. The EPA approved Rule 445, as
amended, into the California SIP on September 26, 2013.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ 78 FR 59249.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Rule 445, persons who manufacture, sell, or install wood-
burning devices, commercial firewood sellers, and property owners or
tenants who operate wood-burning devices are subject to specific
requirements concerning the types of wood-burning devices that may be
manufactured, sold, or installed, the types of fuels that may be burned
in such devices, and labeling requirements. Rule 445 also establishes a
mandatory winter wood-burning curtailment whenever the Executive
Officer declares that ambient PM2.5 levels are forecasted to
exceed 30 [micro]g/m\3\ at specified source receptor areas.\99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ The District has committed to adopt and submit revisions to
Rule 445 to expand the geographic scope of the mandatory wood-
burning curtailment provisions and to lower the curtailment
threshold if the EPA makes any of the findings listed in 40 CFR
51.1014(a). Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael Benjamin, CARB,
to Amy Zimpfer, EPA (enclosing letter dated February 12, 2020, from
Wayne Nastri, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, CARB). For more detail on
the District's commitment, see section V.H of this proposed rule
(``Contingency Measures'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District compared the requirements of Rule 445 to several rules
implemented elsewhere in California that are designed to limit PM
emissions from residential wood-burning devices. Based on this review,
the District concludes that Rule 445 is generally equivalent to these
other rules. Rule 445 does not require the removal of old wood stoves
upon resale of a home, as do rules implemented in several other areas,
but it does contain a prohibition on the installation of any wood-
burning device in new residential developments, except in developments
where there is no existing infrastructure for natural gas service
within 150 feet of the property line or those 3,000 or more feet above
mean sea level. Several other air districts prohibit or limit the
installation of non-certified wood-burning devices but allow for
installation of EPA-certified devices in new developments.
The EPA approved Rule 445 as implementing BACM for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on February 12, 2019.\100\ Since that time, at
least two other California air districts have revised their wood-
burning rules to incorporate more stringent requirements.\101\ Given
that these rules were amended well after both the date of CARB's
submission of the Plan, April 27, 2017, and the statutory deadline for
this plan submission, October 15, 2016,\102\ we find it reasonable that
the SCAQMD did not evaluate these additional control requirements as
part of its RACM analysis in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. Full
evaluation of the additional control requirements in these revised
rules will, however, be required as part of the State/District's BACM
demonstration for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, which will be due
within 18 months after the effective date of a final rule reclassifying
the South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ 84 FR 3305.
\101\ San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Rule 4901, amended June 20, 2019, and Bay Area Air Quality
Management District Rule 6-3, amended November 20, 2019.
\102\ Section 189(a)(2) of the CAA requires submission of
Moderate area plans within 18 months after nonattainment
designations. Because the EPA designated the South Coast as a
nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS effective
April 15, 2015 (80 FR 2206), California was required to submit a
Moderate area plan for this area by October 15, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
445 implements RACM for the control of PM2.5 from
residential wood-burning devices.
Paved and Unpaved Roads and Livestock Operations
Rule 1186 (``PM10 Emissions from Paved and Unpaved
Roads, and Livestock Operations''), amended July 11, 2008, establishes
requirements to reduce the entrainment of PM as a result of vehicular
travel on paved and unpaved public roads and livestock operations. The
EPA approved Rule 1186, as amended, into the California SIP on March 7,
2012.\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ 77 FR 13495.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Rule 1186, owners and operators of paved roads with average
daily vehicle trips exceeding certain thresholds must remove visible
roadway accumulation within specified periods of time and provide
curbing or paved shoulders of certain widths when constructing new or
widened roads. Rule 1186 also requires local government agencies that
own or maintain paved roads to procure only certified street sweeping
equipment for routine street sweeping; establishes requirements for
owners and operators of certain unpaved roads to pave, apply chemical
stabilization, or install signs to reduce vehicular speeds; and
requires owners and operators of livestock operations to cease hay
grinding activities during certain times of day, if visible emissions
extend more than 50 feet from a hay grinding source.
The District compared the key requirements of Rule 1186 to
analogous requirements implemented in other parts of California and in
Nevada. Based on this evaluation, the District concludes that Rule 1186
is generally equivalent to the requirements in these other areas. To
further reduce PM2.5 emissions in areas with high vehicular
activity, the District also considered several additional control
techniques, such as increasing the frequency of street sweeping with
certified equipment and specifying the most effective track out
prevention measures. The District concludes that an increase in the
required frequency of street sweeping is not economically feasible at
this time because most areas in the South Coast air basin already
require regular street sweeping and a requirement to conduct more
frequent street sweeping would achieve only minimal emission
reductions.
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
1186 implements RACM for the control of PM2.5 from paved and
unpaved roads and livestock operations.
Commercial Charbroiling
SCAQMD Rule 1138 (``Control of Emissions from Restaurant
Operations''), adopted November 14, 1997, establishes control
requirements to reduce PM and VOC emissions from chain-driven
charbroilers at commercial cooking operations. The rule does not apply
to under-fired charbroilers (UFCs). The EPA approved Rule 1138 into the
California SIP on July 11, 2001.\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ 66 FR 36170.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40038]]
Under Rule 1138, chain-driven charbroilers that cook 875 pounds of
meat or more per week are required to be equipped and operated with a
catalytic oxidizer control device, and the combination charbroiler/
catalyst must be tested and certified by the Executive Officer to
reduce PM and VOC emissions. The District compared the requirements of
Rule 1138 to several rules implemented in other parts of California and
in other states that are designed to limit PM and/or VOC emissions from
commercial charbroilers. Based on its review of analogous regulations
implemented in these other areas, the District concludes that Rule 1138
is generally equivalent to those regulations.
Several times over the past 20 years and most recently in 2009, the
District considered amending Rule 1138 to regulate PM emissions from
UFCs, but to date the District has not identified control measures for
UFCs that are both technologically and economically feasible for
implementation in the South Coast. Although the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) and New York City Department of
Environmental Protection (NYDEP) have adopted rules that require
controls for UFCs, neither agency has yet confirmed that any regulated
sources that are subject to its rules have successfully installed and
operated certified UFC control technologies.\105\ Staff at the BAAQMD
recently noted that electrostatic precipitators have been installed in
commercial kitchens in San Francisco and San Jose but that the BAAQMD
has not yet enforced control requirements for UFCs because no control
technologies have yet been certified.\106\ The 2016 PM2.5
Plan contains a commitment by the District to adopt a control measure
that requires controls on UFCs by 2025.\107\ The proposed measure is
identified in the Plan as BCM-01.\108\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ Email dated July 11, 2019, from Stanley Tong, EPA Region
IX, to Krishnan Balakrishnan, BAAQMD, Subject: ``Underfired
charbroiler updates'' and email dated June 17, 2019, from Ronald
Vaughn, NYDEP, to Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``RE New
Charbroiler Registrations NYC.'' See also 2016 PM2.5
Plan, IV-A-186 to IV-A-190.
\106\ Email dated January 9, 2020, from Virginia Lau, BAAQMD, to
Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``RE: Underfired charbroiler--
Q: SJ discussion about BA rule.''
\107\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9 and 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7.
\108\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7 and IV-A-186 to IV-
A-192 (describing BCM-01).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and additional information obtained during our
review of the Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
1138 implements RACM for the control of PM2.5 from
commercial charbroilers.
Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters
SCAQMD Rule 1146 (``Emissions of NOX from Industrial,
Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process
Heaters''), Rule 1146.1 (``Emissions of NOX from Small
Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators,
and Process Heaters''), and Rule 1146.2 (``Emissions of NOX
from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers and Process Heaters)
establish NOX emission limits for boilers, steam generators,
and process heaters. The EPA approved Rule 1146 and Rule 1146.1, as
amended November 1, 2013, into the California SIP on September 25,
2014,\109\ and approved Rule 1146.2, as amended May 5, 2006, into the
California SIP on December 5, 2008.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ 79 FR 57442.
\110\ 73 FR 74027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1146 applies to boilers, steam generators, and process heating
units with ratings of more than 5 million British thermal units per
hour (mmbtu/hr); Rule 1146.1 applies to units with ratings ranging from
2 to 5 mmbtu/hr; and Rule 1146.2 applies to units with ratings less
than 2 mmbtu/hr. Each rule sets NOX emission limits for
different fuel types (e.g., digester gas, landfill gas, refinery gas).
Rule 1146 and Rule 1146.1 also establish CO emission limits.
The District compared the requirements of the SIP-approved versions
of Rule 1146, Rule 1146.1, and Rule 1146.2 to several rules implemented
elsewhere in California (i.e., Sacramento, the San Joaquin Valley, and
the San Francisco Bay Area) that limit NOX and/or CO
emissions from boilers, steam generators, process heaters and found
that the SCAQMD rules are generally as stringent as or more stringent
than other California air district rules for this source category. As
part of the EPA's rulemakings to approve these rules into the SIP, the
EPA concluded that the rules meet CAA requirements for enforceability,
RACT, and SIP revisions.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ 79 FR 57442 (September 25, 2014) and 73 FR 74027 (December
5, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD amended Rule 1146, Rule 1146.1, and Rule 1146.2 on December
7, 2018, to initiate the transition of the NOX RECLAIM
program to a command-and-control regulatory structure. Although these
amended rules have not yet been approved into the California SIP, the
rule amendments are estimated to achieve an additional 0.27 tpd of
NOX emission reductions by January 1, 2023.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ SCAQMD Final Staff Report, ``Proposed Amended Rule 1146--
Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and
Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters; Proposed
Amended Rule 1146.1--Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Small
Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators,
and Process Heaters; Proposed Amended Rule 1146.2--Emissions of
Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers and
Process Heaters; and Proposed Rule 1100--Implementation Schedule for
NOx Facilities,'' December 2018, EX-2, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2018/2018-dec7-028.pdf?sfvrsn=6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our evaluation of the information provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and additional information obtained during our
review of the Plan, we agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that Rule
1146, Rule 1146.1, and Rule 1146.2 implement RACM for the control of
NOX from boilers, steam generators, and process heaters.
iii. State Measures for Mobile Sources
CARB's RACM analysis is contained in Attachment VI-A-3
(``California Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control
Measures/Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment'') (``BACM/
RACM assessment'') to Appendix VI-A of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
CARB's BACM/RACM assessment provides a general description of
CARB's existing mobile source programs. A more detailed description of
CARB's mobile source control program, including a comprehensive table
listing on- and off-road mobile source regulatory actions taken by CARB
since 1985, is contained in Attachment VI-C-1 to Appendix VI-C of the
2016 PM2.5 Plan. The BACM/RACM assessment contains CARB's
evaluation of mobile source and other statewide control measures that
reduce emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
California, including the South Coast air basin.
Mobile source categories for which CARB has primary responsibility
for reducing emissions in California include most new and existing on-
and off-road engines and vehicles and motor vehicle fuels. Given the
need for significant emission reductions from mobile sources to meet
the NAAQS in California nonattainment areas, CARB has established
stringent control measures for on-road and off-road mobile sources and
the fuels that power them.\113\ California has unique authority
[[Page 40039]]
under CAA section 209 (subject to a waiver by the EPA) to adopt and
implement new emission standards for many categories of on-road
vehicles and engines, and new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines.
The EPA has approved such mobile source regulations for which waiver
authorizations have been issued as revisions to the California
SIP.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ California regulations use the term ``off-road'' to refer
to ``nonroad'' vehicles and engines.
\114\ See, e.g., 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82 FR 14446 (March
21, 2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May 18, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB's mobile source program extends beyond regulations that are
subject to the waiver or authorization process set forth in CAA section
209 to include standards and other requirements to control emissions
from in-use heavy-duty trucks and buses, gasoline and diesel fuel
specifications, and many other types of mobile sources. Generally,
these regulations have also been submitted and approved as revisions to
the California SIP.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ See, e.g., the EPA's approval of standards and other
requirements to control emissions from in-use heavy-duty diesel-
powered trucks at 77 FR 20308 (April 4, 2012), revisions to the
California on-road reformulated gasoline and diesel fuel regulations
at 75 FR 26653 (May 12, 2010), and revisions to the California motor
vehicle I/M program at 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iv. Local Jurisdiction Transportation Control Measures
Transportation control measures (TCMs) are, in general, measures
designed to reduce emissions from on-road motor vehicles through
reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or traffic congestion. TCMs
can reduce PM2.5 emissions in both the on-road motor vehicle
exhaust and paved road dust source categories by reducing VMT and
vehicle trips. They can also reduce vehicle exhaust emissions by
relieving congestion. EPA guidance states that where mobile sources
contribute significantly to PM2.5 violations, ``the state
must, at a minimum, address the transportation control measures listed
in CAA section 108(f) to determine whether such measures are achievable
in the area considering energy, environmental, and economic impacts and
other costs.'' \116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ Addendum to General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998
(August 16, 1994) (hereafter ``Addendum''), 42013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix IV-C, ``Regional Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures,'' contains SCAG's RACM analysis for TCMs. Consistent with EPA
guidance, SCAG addressed the TCMs listed in CAA section 108(f)
following a four-step process: (1) SCAG described the process by which
they and the applicable transportation agencies in the South Coast air
basin identify, review, and make enforceable commitments to implement
TCMs; (2) SCAG assembled and reviewed control measures implemented in
other ozone nonattainment areas (both in California and in other
states); (3) SCAG compared candidate measures with measures implemented
in the South Coast air basin to date, as well as new TCMs in the
current Plan; and (4) SCAG provided reasoned justification for any
available measures that have yet to be implemented. Based on their
review, SCAG determined that the TCMs currently being implemented in
the South Coast air basin include all RACM and that none of the
identified candidate measures are both technically and economically
feasible and would advance the attainment date in the South Coast.
Attachment B of Appendix IV-C of the Plan contains a complete listing
of all candidate measures evaluated as potential RACM, including a
description of each measure, an indication of whether the measure is
currently being implemented in the SCAG region, and a reasoned
justification for SCAG's rejection of any measures that it has not
adopted.
b. Additional Reasonable Measures
As discussed above, the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule
defines control measures that otherwise meet the definition of RACM but
can only be implemented during the period beginning four years after
the effective date of designation but before the Moderate area
attainment date as ``additional reasonable measures.'' \117\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ 40 CFR 51.1000, 51.1009(a)(4)(i)(B), and
51.1009(a)(4)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan identifies four cost effective and
technologically feasible control measures to be implemented in the year
2020.\118\ These measures are BCM-04, BCM-10, CMB-03, and CMB-02.
Because each of these measures is to be implemented in 2020, after the
April 15, 2019 deadline for implementation of RACM/RACT but before the
Moderate area attainment date of December 31, 2021, the District
identifies these measures as ``additional reasonable measures'' for
purposes of providing progress towards attainment of the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.\119\ Details regarding the cost effectiveness
analysis and the schedule for implementation of each of these four
measures are provided in Chapter 4, Appendix IV-A, and Appendix IV-B of
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-8.
\119\ Id., Table VI-A-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Enforceable Commitments
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes commitments by the District
to adopt and implement certain measures and to achieve specific
emission reductions in the South Coast area for purposes of attaining
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by 2025. Specifically, the SCAQMD has
committed to (1) adopt, submit, and implement the control measures
listed in Table 4-7 of the Plan by specified dates to achieve the total
tonnages of emission reductions identified in Table 4-8 of the Plan, or
substitute other measures as necessary to achieve those emission
reductions, and (2) achieve the total tonnages of reductions of each
pollutant by the dates specified in Table 4-8 of the Plan.\120\ If the
SCAQMD determines that a particular measure listed in Table 4-7 of the
Plan is infeasible, in whole or in part, the SCAQMD's commitment is to
substitute other measures that will achieve equivalent emission
reductions in the same adoption or implementation timeframes.\121\ The
2016 PM2.5 Plan relies on these emission reduction
commitments (also referred to as ``aggregate tonnage commitments'') as
part of the control strategy for meeting the 2022 RFP milestones in the
Plan and attaining the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31,
2025 Serious area attainment date.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9. The District clarified its aggregate tonnage commitments
for the 2022 RFP milestone year in its Control Strategy Updates,
``Summary'' tab (``South Coast AQMD Reasonable Further Progress for
2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard'').
\121\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4, 4-53 and 4-54.
\122\ Id. at 4-53 to 4-54 and Table 4-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District expects to meet its emission reduction commitments by
adopting new control measures and programs and by strengthening
existing control measures, as identified in Table 4-7 and Table 4-8 of
the Plan. These new or revised control measures include rules to
regulate appliances in commercial and residential applications,
livestock wastes, non-refinery flares, greenwaste composting, and
restaurant burners and residential cooking.
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
a. RACM/RACT and Additional Reasonable Measures
We have reviewed the District's determination in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan that its stationary and area source control
measures represent RACM for PM2.5 and PM2.5
precursors. In our review, we also considered our previous evaluations
of the District's rules in
[[Page 40040]]
connection with our approval of the SCAQMD's RACT SIP demonstration for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\123\ Based on this review, we believe the
District's rules provide for the implementation of RACM for stationary
and area sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ 82 FR 43850 (September 20, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to mobile sources, CARB's current program addresses
the full range of mobile sources in the South Coast through regulatory
programs for both new and in-use vehicles. With respect to
transportation controls, we find that SCAG has a well-established TCM
development program in which TCMs are continuously identified,
reviewed, and evaluated throughout the transportation planning process.
Overall, we believe that the programs developed and administered by
CARB and SCAG provide for the implementation of RACM for
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the South Coast
nonattainment area.
Finally, the 2016 PM2.5 Plan contains enforceable
commitments to adopt and implement a number of additional reasonable
measures by 2020, for purposes of meeting the 2022 RFP milestones in
the Plan and attaining the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December
31, 2025 Serious area attainment date.
For all of these reasons, we propose to find that the 2016
PM2.5 Plan provides for the implementation of RACM and
additional reasonable measures for all sources of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors as expeditiously as
practicable, for purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the
South Coast area, in accordance with the requirements of CAA section
189(a)(1)(C) and 40 CFR 51.1009.
b. Enforceable Commitments
In addition, we are proposing to approve the District's enforceable
commitments to adopt and implement certain measures by specific dates
and to achieve specific tonnages of emission reductions from these or
appropriate substitute measures, by 2022, as part of the control
strategy and RFP demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. These
commitments to adopt and implement control measures and to achieve
emission reductions, in the aggregate, by specified dates satisfy the
EPA's 3-factor test for approval of such enforceable commitments.
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan provides for the majority of the
emission reductions necessary for making progress towards attainment to
be achieved from baseline measures. These reductions come from a
combination of District, State, and federal stationary and mobile
source measures.\124\ Over the past four decades, the District has
adopted or revised almost 100 prohibitory rules that limit emissions of
direct PM, NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia from
stationary sources. The vast majority of these rules are currently SIP-
approved and as such, their emission reductions are fully creditable in
attainment-related SIPs. California has also adopted standards for many
categories of on- and off-road vehicles and engines as well as
standards for gasoline and diesel fuels. The State's mobile source
measures are discussed in Section V.D.2.a.iii of this proposed rule.
The remaining reductions needed for attainment are to be achieved
through the District's enforceable commitments to achieve emission
reductions in the South Coast through the anticipated defined control
measures listed in Table 4-7 and Table 4-8 of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ Federal measures include the EPA's national emission
standards for heavy duty diesel trucks (66 FR 5001 (January 18,
2001)), certain new construction and farm equipment (Tier 2 and 3
non-road engines standards (63 FR 56968 (October 23, 1998), and Tier
4 diesel non-road engine standards (69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004)),
and locomotives (63 FR 18978 (April 16, 1998) and 73 FR 37096 (June
30, 2008)). States are allowed to rely on reductions from federal
measures in attainment and RFP demonstrations and for other SIP
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, circumstances
warrant the consideration of enforceable commitments as part of the
control strategy and RFP demonstration for the South Coast
nonattainment area. As discussed below, a majority of the emission
reductions that are needed to demonstrate RFP in the South Coast
nonattainment area come from rules and regulations that were adopted
prior the submittal of the Plan in April 2017 (i.e., baseline
measures). As a result of these already-adopted State and District
measures, most sources in the South Coast nonattainment area were
already subject to stringent rules prior to the development of the
Plan, leaving fewer and more technologically challenging opportunities
to reduce emissions. In the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, the District
identified potential control measures that could achieve the additional
emission reductions needed to demonstrate RFP toward attainment by the
Serious area attainment date. However, the timeline needed to develop,
adopt, and implement these measures went beyond the October 15, 2016
statutory deadline for submitting the Plan. The District has made
progress in adopting measures to meet its commitments but has not yet
completely fulfilled them. Given these circumstances, the 2016
PM2.5 Plan's reliance on enforceable commitments is
warranted. We now consider the three factors the EPA uses to determine
whether the use of enforceable commitments in lieu of adopted measures
satisfies CAA planning requirements.
i. Commitments Are a Limited Portion of Required Reductions
For the first factor, we look to see if the commitment addresses a
limited portion of a statutory requirement, such as the amount of
emission reductions needed to demonstrate RFP in a nonattainment area.
As discussed in greater detail in section V.G, the Plan demonstrates
RFP for the 2019 RFP milestone year and 2022 post-attainment milestone
year for purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 Moderate area plan. For
the 2019 milestone year, the plan demonstrates that RFP is achieved by
emission reductions from baseline measures alone, whereas the RFP
demonstration for the 2022 milestone year relies on emission reductions
from new control measures committed to in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan.\125\ As shown in Table 3, of the emission reductions needed to
meet the 2022 RFP milestone for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the
South Coast nonattainment area, 7 tpd of NOX emission
reductions need to be achieved by new or revised control strategy
measures --that is, State and District baseline measures achieve all
but 7 tpd of the NOX emission reductions necessary to meet
the RFP milestone for 2022. This represents approximately 3 percent of
the NOX reductions needed to meet the 2022 RFP milestone.
Historically, the EPA has approved SIPs with enforceable commitments in
the range of approximately 10 to 13 percent of the total reductions
needed for attainment.\126\ We find that the District's NOX
commitment addresses a limited proportion of the required emission
reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-5A.
\126\ See, e.g., our approvals of the SJV PM10 plan
at 69 FR 30005 (May 26, 2004), the SJV 1-hour ozone plan at 75 FR
10420 (March 8, 2010), the Houston-Galveston 1-hour ozone plan at 66
FR 57160 (November 14, 2001), the SJV PM2.5 plan at 76 FR
69896 (November 9, 2011), and the South Coast PM2.5 plan
at 76 FR 69928 (November 9, 2011).
[[Page 40041]]
Table 3--Reductions Needed for RFP Remaining as Commitments Based on SIP-Creditable Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX SOX VOC Ammonia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 2012 baseline emissions level 66.4 540 18.4 470 81.1
B. 2022 RFP target level........ 64.6 283 17.6 367 74.4
C. Total reductions needed from 1.8 257 0.8 103 6.7
2012 baseline levels to
demonstrate RFP (A-B)..........
D. 2022 RFP baseline emissions 64 290 17 362 73
level..........................
E. Reductions from baseline 2.4 250 1.4 108 8.1
measures (A-D).................
F. Reductions needed from new/ 0 7 0 0 0
revised control strategy
measures (D-B).................
G. Percent of reductions needed 0 2.7% 0 0 0
to meet RFP from new control
measures (F/C).................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 3-4B and Table VI-C-5A.
ii. The State Is Capable of Fulfilling Its Commitment
For the second factor, we consider whether the District is capable
of fulfilling its commitments.
The District has made significant progress in meeting its
enforceable commitments for the 2022 post-attainment RFP milestone
year. It has adopted numerous baseline measures that are projected to
achieve additional reductions of NOX in future years as
shown in Table 4. In addition to the measures discussed above, both
CARB and the District have well-funded incentive grant programs to
reduce emissions from the on- and off-road engine fleets. Reductions
from these programs have yet to be quantified and/or credited in the
RFP demonstration.
Table 4--SCAQMD Control Measure Updates Since the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC
Control measure Rule Adoption Final implementation reduction reduction
date date(s) (tpd) (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMB-02.......................... Rule 1111-- * 3/2/ 1/1/2046................. 0.017 ..........
``Natural-Gas- 2018
Fired, Fan-Type
Central
Furnaces''.
CTS-01 (2012 AQMP).............. Rule 1113-- 2/5/2016 1/1/2019................. .......... 0.88
``Architectural
Coatings''.
CMB-03.......................... Rule 1118.1-- 1/4/2019 7/1/2024................. 0.2 ..........
``Non-Refinery
Flares''.
CMB-01, CMB-05.................. Rule 1134-- 4/5/2019 12/31/2023............... 2.8 ..........
``Stationary
Gas Turbines''.
CMB-01, CMB-05.................. Rule 1135-- 11/2/2018 1/1/2024................. 1.8 0.014
``Electricity
Generating
Facilities''.
CMB-01, CMB-05.................. Rule 1146, Rule 12/7/2018 1/1/2023................. 0.27 ..........
1146.1, Rule
1146.2--``Non-
Refinery
Boilers and
Heaters''.
CTS-01.......................... Rule 1168-- 10/6/2017 2017, 2019, 2023......... .......... 1.4
``Adhesive and
Sealant
Applications''.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Email dated September 12, 2019 from Kalam Cheung, SCAQMD, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX, attaching
spreadsheet entitled ``Draft Rule Adoption since 2016 AQMP 20190809.xlsx.''
* SCAQMD further amended Rule 1111 on July 6, 2018 and December 6, 2019.
Given the District's efforts to date and its continuing efforts to
reduce emissions, we believe it is capable of meeting its enforceable
commitments to achieve the reductions needed to meet its 2022 RFP
milestones for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
iii. The Commitment Is for a Reasonable and Appropriate Timeframe
For the third and last factor, we consider whether the commitment
is for a reasonable and appropriate period of time.
In order to meet the commitments to adopt measures and reduce
emissions to the levels needed to meet the area's 2022 RFP milestones
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast nonattainment
area, the 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes ambitious rule
development, adoption, and implementation schedules for a number of
defined control measures. The District has committed to achieve 20.5
tpd of NOX emission reductions by 2022 through adoption and
implementation of these defined measures or substitute measures that
achieve equivalent emission reductions. We believe that these
timeframes are appropriate given the technological and economic
challenges associated with the control measures that will be needed to
achieve these reductions and the State's and District's required
procedures for development and adoption of these measures. In addition,
these reductions are not needed to meet the earlier 2019 RFP
milestones. Thus, the commitment is for a reasonable and appropriate
period of time.
Based on our consideration of these three factors, we are proposing
to approve the District's commitments to adopt and implement specific
control measures on the schedule identified in Table 4-7 and Table 4-8
of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to the extent that these commitments
have not yet been fulfilled, and to achieve specific emission
reductions by 2022, as given in these tables and in the Control
Strategy Updates.
E. Major Stationary Source Control Requirements Under CAA Section
189(e)
CAA section 189(e) specifically requires that the control
requirements applicable to major stationary sources of direct
PM2.5 also apply to major stationary sources of
PM2.5 precursors, except where the Administrator determines
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5
levels that exceed the standards in the area.\127\ The control
requirements applicable to major stationary sources of direct
PM2.5 in a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area
include, at a minimum, the requirements of a NNSR permit program
meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A). In
the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, we established a deadline
for states to
[[Page 40042]]
submit NNSR plan revisions to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS 18
months after an area is initially designated and classified as a
Moderate nonattainment area.\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ General Preamble, 13539 and 13541-13542.
\128\ 81 FR 58010, 58115.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
California submitted NNSR SIP revisions for the South Coast to
address the subpart 4 requirements for Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment areas on December 29, 2014.\129\ The EPA fully approved
these SIP revisions on May 1, 2015.\130\ California also submitted NNSR
SIP revisions for the South Coast to address the subpart 4 requirements
for Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas on May 8, 2017, and
the EPA conditionally approved these SIP revisions on November 30,
2018.\131\ The basis for the November 30, 2018 conditional approval was
a commitment by CARB and the SCAQMD to submit a revised version of Rule
1325 by December 30, 2019. CARB submitted a revised version of Rule
1325 to the EPA on April 24, 2019, fulfilling this commitment.\132\
Accordingly, in this action, the EPA is not addressing the NNSR control
requirements that apply to major stationary sources of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the South Coast
area under CAA section 189(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ Letter dated December 29, 2014, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9.
\130\ 80 FR 24821.
\131\ 83 FR 61551.
\132\ Letter dated April 24, 2019, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Demonstration That Attainment by the Moderate Area Attainment Date
Is Impracticable
1. Requirements for Attainment/Impracticability of Attainment
Demonstrations
CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requires that each Moderate area
attainment plan include a demonstration that the plan provides for
attainment by the applicable Moderate area attainment date or,
alternatively, that attainment by such date is impracticable. This
provision explicitly requires that a demonstration of attainment be
based on air quality modeling but does not require such modeling for an
impracticability demonstration. Although the EPA expects that most
impracticability demonstrations will also be supported by air quality
modeling, it may be possible in some cases to support an
impracticability demonstration with ambient PM2.5 data and
other relevant non-modeling information.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ 81 FR 58010, 58048 and 58049.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 188(c) states, in relevant part, that the Moderate area
attainment date ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the end of the sixth calendar year after the area's designation as
nonattainment . . .'' For the South Coast area, which was initially
designated as nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard
effective April 15, 2015, the applicable Moderate area attainment date
under section 188(c) for this standard is as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December 31, 2021.
In SIP submissions that demonstrate impracticability, the state
should document how its required control strategy in the attainment
plan represents the application of RACM/RACT and additional reasonable
measures, at minimum, to existing sources. The EPA believes it is
appropriate to require adoption of all available control measures that
are reasonable, i.e., technologically and economically feasible, in
areas that do not demonstrate timely attainment, even where those
measures cannot be implemented within the 4-year timeframe for
implementation of RACM/RACT under CAA section 189(a)(1)(C). The
impracticability demonstration will then be based on a showing that the
area cannot attain by the applicable attainment date, notwithstanding
implementation of the required controls.
2. Impracticability Demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes a demonstration, based on
air quality modeling, that even with the implementation of RACM/RACT
and additional reasonable measures for all appropriate sources,
attainment by December 31, 2021 is not practicable. The
impracticability demonstration is included in Appendix VI-B of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan.
Modeled annual average PM2.5 concentrations are
presented for five monitoring sites representing high PM2.5
concentrations in the South Coast air basin. Annual PM2.5
concentrations were modeled for the 2012 base year and 2021 attainment
year. For 2021, the District examined both baseline and control
scenarios. The demonstration is summarized in Table 5.
Table 5--Impracticability Demonstration--Annual Average PM2.5 Design Concentrations
[[micro]g/m\3\]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021
Station 2012 2021 Baseline Controlled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles..................................................... 12.4 10.9 10.6
Anaheim......................................................... 10.6 9.4 9.1
Rubidoux........................................................ 13.2 11.2 10.9
Mira Loma....................................................... 14.9 12.6 12.3
Fontana......................................................... 12.6 10.6 10.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-B-2.
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
The impracticability demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan is based on air quality modeling that is generally consistent with
applicable EPA guidance. We find the modeling adequate to support the
impracticability demonstration in the plan. See section V.C of this
notice.
We have also evaluated the RACM/RACT and additional reasonable
measures demonstration and find that it provides for the expeditious
implementation of all RACM/RACT and additional reasonable measures that
may feasibly be implemented at this time, consistent with the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast. See section V.D of this
notice.
Finally, we have evaluated the demonstration in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan that the implementation of the State/District's
SIP control strategy, including
[[Page 40043]]
RACM/RACT and additional reasonable measures, is insufficient to bring
the South Coast into attainment by December 31, 2021. In addition to
the information in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, we have reviewed
recent PM2.5 monitoring data from the South Coast. These
data show that annual PM2.5 levels in the South Coast, with
a current design value (2016-2018) of 14.7 [micro]g/m\3\, continue to
be well above the 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ level of the 2012 PM2.5
standard, and the recent trends in annual PM2.5 levels in
the South Coast are not consistent with a projection of attainment by
the end of 2021.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ EPA, Design Value Spreadsheets,
``20200306_SouthCoastPM25Annual.xlsx'' and
``pm25_designvalues_20162018_final_12_03_19.xlsx.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this evaluation, we propose to approve the State's
demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan that attainment of the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast by the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2021, is impracticable, consistent with
the requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii). On this basis, we
also propose to reclassify the South Coast as a Serious nonattainment
area, which would trigger requirements for the State to submit a
Serious area plan consistent with the requirements of subparts 1 and 4
of part D, title I of the Act (see section VI of this notice).
G. Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative Milestones
1. Requirements for Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative
Milestones
CAA section 172(c)(2) states that all nonattainment area plans
shall require RFP. In addition, CAA section 189(c) requires that all
PM2.5 nonattainment area SIPs include quantitative
milestones to be achieved every three years until the area is
redesignated to attainment and which demonstrate RFP. Section 171(1)
defines RFP as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the
relevant air pollutant as are required by [Part D] or may reasonably be
required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of
the applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.'' Neither subpart 1 nor
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act requires that a set percentage
of emission reductions be achieved in any given year for purposes of
satisfying the RFP requirement.
For purposes of the PM2.5 NAAQS, the EPA has interpreted
the RFP requirement to require that nonattainment area plans show
annual incremental emission reductions sufficient to maintain generally
linear progress toward attainment by the applicable deadline.\135\ As
discussed in EPA guidance in the Addendum to the General Preamble
(``Addendum''),\136\ requiring linear progress in reductions of direct
PM2.5 and any individual precursor in a PM2.5
plan may be appropriate in situations where:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ Addendum to the General Preamble, 59 FR 41998, 42015
(August 16, 1994).
\136\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pollutant is emitted by a large number and range of
sources,
the relationship between any individual source or source
category and overall air quality is not well known,
a chemical transformation is involved (e.g., secondary
particulate significantly contributes to PM2.5 levels over
the standard), and/or
the emission reductions necessary to attain the
PM2.5 standard are inventory-wide.\137\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Addendum indicates that requiring linear progress may be less
appropriate in other situations, such as:
Where there are a limited number of sources of direct
PM2.5 or a precursor,
where the relationships between individual sources and air
quality are relatively well defined, and/or
where the emission control systems utilized (e.g., at
major point sources) will result in a swift and dramatic emission
reductions.
In nonattainment areas characterized by any of these latter
conditions, RFP may be better represented as step-wise progress as
controls are implemented and achieve significant reductions soon
thereafter. For example, if an area's nonattainment problem can be
attributed to a few major sources, EPA guidance indicates that ``RFP
should be met by `adherence to an ambitious compliance schedule' which
is likely to periodically yield significant emission reductions of
direct PM2.5 or a PM2.5 precursor.'' \138\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment plans for PM2.5 nonattainment areas should
include detailed schedules for compliance with emission regulations in
the area and provide corresponding annual emission reductions to be
achieved by each milestone in the schedule.\139\ In reviewing an
attainment plan under subpart 4, the EPA considers whether the annual
incremental emission reductions to be achieved are reasonable in light
of the statutory objective of timely attainment. Although early
implementation of the most cost-effective control measures is often
appropriate, states should consider both cost-effectiveness and
pollution reduction effectiveness when developing implementation
schedules for control measures and may implement measures that are more
effective at reducing PM2.5 earlier, to provide greater
public health benefits.\140\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\139\ Id. at 42016.
\140\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule establishes specific
regulatory requirements for purposes of satisfying the Act's RFP
requirements and provides related guidance in the preamble to the rule.
Specifically, under the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, each
PM2.5 attainment plan must contain an RFP analysis that
includes, at a minimum, the following four components: (1) An
implementation schedule for control measures; (2) RFP projected
emissions for direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 plan
precursors for each applicable milestone year, based on the anticipated
control measure implementation schedule; (3) a demonstration that the
control strategy and implementation schedule will achieve reasonable
progress toward attainment between the base year and the attainment
year; and (4) a demonstration that by the end of the calendar year for
each milestone date for the area, pollutant emissions will be at levels
that reflect either generally linear progress or stepwise progress in
reducing emissions on an annual basis between the base year and the
attainment year.\141\ States should estimate the RFP projected
emissions for each quantitative milestone year by sector on a
pollutant-by-pollutant basis.\142\ In an area that cannot practicably
attain the PM2.5 standard by the applicable Moderate area
attainment date, full implementation of a control strategy that
satisfies the Moderate area control requirements represents RFP towards
attainment.\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ 40 CFR 51.1012(a).
\142\ 81 FR 58010, 58056.
\143\ Id. at 58056, 58057.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 189(c) requires that attainment plans include quantitative
milestones that demonstrate RFP. The purpose of the quantitative
milestones is to allow for periodic evaluation of the area's progress
towards attainment of the NAAQS consistent with RFP requirements.
Because RFP is an annual emission reduction requirement and the
quantitative milestones are to be achieved every three years, when a
state demonstrates compliance with the quantitative milestone
requirement, it will demonstrate that RFP has been achieved during each
of the relevant three years. Quantitative milestones
[[Page 40044]]
should provide an objective means to evaluate progress toward
attainment meaningfully, e.g., through imposition of emission controls
in the attainment plan and the requirement to quantify those required
emission reductions. The CAA also requires states to submit milestone
reports (due 90 days after each milestone), and these reports should
include calculations and any assumptions made by the state concerning
how RFP has been met, e.g., through quantification of emission
reductions to date.\144\ The Act requires states to include RFP and
quantitative milestones even for areas that cannot practicably attain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\144\ Addendum, 42016-42017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAA does not specify the starting point for counting the three-
year periods for quantitative milestones under CAA section 189(c). In
the General Preamble and Addendum, the EPA interpreted the CAA to
require that the starting point for the first three-year period be the
due date for the Moderate area plan submission.\145\ Consistent with
this longstanding interpretation of the Act, the PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule requires that each plan for a Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area contain quantitative milestones to
be achieved no later than milestone dates 4.5 years and 7.5 years from
the date of designation of the area.\146\ Because the EPA designated
the South Coast area nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
effective April 15, 2015,\147\ the applicable quantitative milestone
dates for purposes of this NAAQS in the South Coast are October 15,
2019 and October 15, 2022. Following reclassification of the South
Coast area as Serious for the 2012 PM2.5 standard, later
milestones would be addressed by the Serious area plan.\148\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\145\ General Preamble, 13539, and Addendum, 42016.
\146\ 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(1).
\147\ 80 FR 2206.
\148\ Addendum, 42016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration and Quantitative
Milestones in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The RFP plan and quantitative milestones are discussed in section
VI-C of Appendix VI of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. The Plan
estimates that emissions of direct PM2.5, NOX,
SOX, VOC, and ammonia will generally decline from the 2012
base year and states that emissions of each of these pollutants will
remain below the levels needed to show ``generally linear progress''
through 2022, the Moderate area post-attainment milestone year for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\149\ The Plan's emissions inventory shows
that direct PM2.5, NOX, SOX, VOC, and
ammonia are emitted by a large number and range of sources in the South
Coast and that the emission reductions needed for each of these
pollutants are inventory-wide.\150\ Table VI-C-4 of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan contains an implementation schedule for adopted
District control measures,\151\ Table VI-C-6 contains emission
reduction commitments to be achieved each year from 2016 to 2025, and
Table VI-C-5 (reproduced, in part,\152\ in Table 6) contains RFP
projected emissions for each quantitative milestone year. Based on
these analyses, the District concludes that its adopted control
strategy will achieve, for each pollutant, projected emission levels at
or below the RFP and quantitative milestone target emission levels for
2019 and 2022 (see Table 7).\153\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\149\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-5 and Table VI-C-
5A.
\150\ Id., Chapter 4 and appendices IV-A, VI-B, and VI-C.
\151\ See also email dated September 12, 2019 from Kalam Cheung,
SCAQMD, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX, attaching spreadsheet
entitled ``Draft Rule Adoption since 2016 AQMP 20190809.xlsx.''
\152\ Table 6 identifies only emission levels for milestone
years that must be addressed by the Moderate area plan.
\153\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, VI-C-9.
Table 6--Annual PM2.5 Baseline Emissions for Base Year and Moderate Area Plan Milestone Years
[Annual average tpd]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 2022
Pollutant 2012 Baseline (Quantitative (Quantitative
milestone) milestone)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5........................................................... 66.4 63.9 64.1
NOX............................................................. 540 353 275
SOX............................................................. 18.4 16.6 17.0
VOC............................................................. 470 376 348
Ammonia......................................................... 81.1 74.0 72.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-5.
Table 7--Summary of Annual PM2.5 RFP Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Row Calculation step PM2.5 NOX SOX VOC Ammonia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................... 2012 base year emissions 66.4 540 18.4 470 81.1
(tpd).
2.................... Annual percent change 0.27 4.8 0.43 2.2 0.83
needed to show linear
progress (%).
3.................... 2019 target needed to 65.2 360 17.8 398 76.4
show linear progress
(tpd).
4.................... 2019 baseline emissions 63.9 353 16.6 376 74.0
(tpd).
5.................... Projected shortfall 0 0 0 0 0
(tpd).
6.................... Surplus in 2019 (tpd)... 1.3 6.8 1.2 22.2 2.4
7.................... 2022 target needed to 64.6 283 17.6 367 74.4
show linear progress
(%).
8.................... 2022 emissions (tpd) *.. 64.1 275 17.0 348 72.6
9.................... Projected shortfall 0 0 0 0 0
(tpd).
10................... Surplus in 2022 (tpd)... 0.56 8.0 0.59 18.5 1.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Based on controlled emissions with emission reductions committed to in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-5A.
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan documents the State's conclusion
that all RACM/RACT and additional reasonable measures for these
pollutants are being implemented as expeditiously as practicable and
identifies projected levels of direct
[[Page 40045]]
PM2.5, NOX, SOX, VOC, and ammonia
emissions that reflect full implementation of the State, District, and
SCAG's RACM/RACT and additional reasonable measure control strategy for
these pollutants.\154\ The control strategy that provides the basis for
these emission projections is described in Chapter 4, Appendix IV, and
Appendix VI of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\154\ Id. at VI-C-5 to VI-C-12; see also evaluation of RACM/RACT
in section V.D of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct PM2.5
The District has several stationary and area source rules that are
projected to contribute to RFP and attainment of the PM2.5
standards.\155\ For example, Rule 444 (``Open Burning'') and Rule 445
(``Residential Wood Burning Devices'') were amended in 2013 to achieve
PM2.5 reductions during winter episodic conditions. The 2013
amendments to Rule 445 lowered the mandatory winter burning curtailment
program threshold for residential wood burning and, in certain cases,
extended the curtailment to the entire South Coast air basin, thereby
further limiting emissions from one of the largest direct
PM2.5 combustion sources in the South Coast nonattainment
area.\156\ These rule amendments provide part of the incremental
reductions in emissions of direct PM2.5 needed from the 2012
base year to meet RFP requirements.\157\ Measures to control sources of
direct PM2.5 are also presented in the Plan's RACM analyses
and are reflected in the Plan's baseline emission projections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\155\ Id., Table III-2-2B and Table 4-8.
\156\ Id., Table III-1-2. See also 78 FR 59249 (September 26,
2013).
\157\ Id., Table VI-C-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan highlights on-road and other mobile source control
measures as the primary means for achieving direct PM2.5
emission reductions. CARB's implementation of the Truck and Bus
Regulation achieved PM2.5 emission reductions beginning in
2012.\158\ Lighter trucks and buses were required to replace 1995 and
older engines with a 2010 model year by 2015. The 2010 model year
engines include particulate filters. CARB's LEV II program includes PM
emission limits by model year for 2016, and the LEV II program has
stricter emission limits for 2017 and beyond. For off-road vehicles,
CARB adopted the In-Use Off Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation
(``Off-Road Regulation'') in 2007. The Off-Road Regulation requires
owners to replace older vehicles or engines with newer, cleaner models
to either (1) retire older vehicles or reduce their use, or (2) to
apply retrofit exhaust controls. Off-road fleets are required to meet
increasingly strict fleet average indices over time.\159\ These indices
reflect a fleet's overall emission rates of PM and NOX for
model year and horsepower combinations. Fleets were also banned from
adding Tier 0 off-road engines as of January 1, 2014.\160\ CARB
implemented a similar ban on Tier 1 engines between January 1, 2014
(large fleets) and January 1, 2016 (small fleets).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\158\ The State's quantitative milestone report for the 2017
milestone for the 2006 PM2.5 standards indicates that the
requirement for heavier trucks to install diesel particulate filters
was fully implemented by 2016. See SCAQMD, ``2017 Quantitative
Milestone Report for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' March 2018 (``2017 QM Report''), 11.
\159\ A fleet average index is an indicator of a fleet's overall
emissions rate of PM and NOX based on the horsepower and
model year of each engine in the fleet.
\160\ Tier 0 engines meet 1995 to 1999 emission standards,
depending on engine size and horsepower. See http://www.assocpower.com/eqdata/tech/US-EPA-Tier-Chart_1995-2004.php.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides
The District regulates numerous NOX emission sources
such as residential space and water heating devices, stationary
internal combustion engines, and various sizes of boilers, steam
generators, and process heaters used in industrial settings. The 2016
PM2.5 Plan identifies the following South Coast regulations
as measures that achieve ongoing NOX reductions with
compliance dates during the RFP years of the Plan: Rule 1111
(``Reductions of NOX from Natural Gas-Fired, Fan-Type
Central Furnaces''), Rule 1146.2 (``Emission of Oxides of Nitrogen from
Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers and Process Heaters''), and Rule
1147 (``NOX Reductions from Miscellaneous
Sources'').161 162
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\161\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-4. See also email
dated September 12, 2019 from Kalam Cheung, SCAQMD, to Ashley
Graham, EPA Region IX, attaching spreadsheet entitled ``Draft Rule
Adoption since 2016 AQMP 20190809.xlsx.''
\162\ Rule 1111 was mistakenly listed as Rule 1110 in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-4. See 2017 QM Report, 6, footnote
1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these baseline measures, the District has committed
to adopt and implement several new measures to reduce NOX
emissions and ensure RFP toward attainment of the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS in the South Coast air basin. These measures may include CMB-01
(``Transition to Zero and Near-Zero Emission Technologies for
Stationary Sources''), CMB-02 (``Emission Reductions from Replacement
with Zero or Near-Zero NOX Appliances in Commercial and
Residential Applications''), CMB-03 (``Emission Reductions from Non-
Refinery Flares''), CMB-04 (``Emission Reductions from Restaurant
Burners and Residential Cooking''), ECC-02 (``Co-Benefits from Existing
Residential and Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Measures''), ECC-
03 (``Additional Enhancements in Reducing Residential Building Energy
Use''), MOB-10 (``Extension of the SOON Provision for Construction/
Industrial Equipment''), MOB-11 (``Extended Exchange Program''), and
MOB-14 (``Emission Reductions from Incentive Programs'').\163\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\163\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-C-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For on-road and non-road mobile sources, which represent the
largest sources of NOX emissions in the nonattainment area,
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan lists numerous CARB regulations and
discusses the key regulations that limit emissions of direct
PM2.5 as well as NOX, SO2, VOC, and
ammonia from these sources.\164\ For example, the regulations that
apply to the three largest sources of NOX in the South
Coast--heavy-duty diesel trucks, light- and medium-duty passenger
vehicles, and off-road equipment--are discussed in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan at Appendix VI-C, Attachment VI-C-1, ``California
Existing Mobile Source Control Program,'' and CARB's emission
projections for these sources are presented in the Plan's emissions
inventory.\165\ The Plan also shows that NOX emission levels
in the 2019 and 2022 milestone years are projected to be below the
levels needed to show generally linear progress toward attainment in
2025.\166\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\164\ Id., Appendix VI-C, Attachment VI-C-1.
\165\ Id., Appendix III.
\166\ Id., Table VI-C-5A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck Regulation became
effective in 2011 and have rolling compliance deadlines based on truck
engine model year. These and other regulations applicable to heavy-duty
diesel trucks will continue to reduce emissions of diesel PM and
NOX through the RFP planning years.\167\ For example, model
year 1994 and 1995 heavy-duty diesel truck engines were required to be
upgraded to meet the 2010 model year truck engine emission standards by
2016, and model year 1996-1999 engines must be upgraded by January 1,
2020.\168\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\167\ Id. at VI-C-20.
\168\ Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Section 2025
(``Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter,
Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants, from In-Use Heavy-
Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles''), paragraphs (e), (f), and (g),
effective December 14, 2011. See also 77 FR 20308, 20309-20310
(April 4, 2012) (final rule approving CARB's Truck and Bus Rule into
California SIP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40046]]
CARB's Cleaner In-Use Off-road Equipment regulation was first
approved in 2007 to reduce PM2.5 and NOX
emissions from in-use off-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California
such as those used in construction, mining, and industrial operations.
The regulation reduces emissions of PM2.5 and NOX
by targeting the existing fleet and imposing idling limits,
restrictions on use of older vehicles, and requirements to retrofit or
replace the oldest engines. For example, Tier 0 engines could not be
added to fleets after January 1, 2014, and Tier 1 engines could not be
added after January 1, 2016. The regulation was phased in between
January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2019.\169\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\169\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI-C, Attachment VI-
C-1, VI-C-23 and VI-C-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds
As with other precursors, the District regulates stationary and
area sources of VOCs, and CARB is largely responsible for regulating
emissions from both on-road and off-road mobile sources. The 2016
PM2.5 Plan highlights one adopted stationary source VOC rule
that contributes to RFP: Rule 1114 (``Petroleum Refinery Coking
Operations'').\170\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\170\ Id., Table VI-C-4. See also, email dated September 12,
2019 from Kalam Cheung, SCAQMD, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX,
attaching spreadsheet entitled ``Draft Rule Adoption since 2016 AQMP
20190809.xlsx.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the baseline measures discussed above, the District
intends to adopt and implement several measures to reduce
NOX emissions that may also result in VOC emission
reductions and help ensure RFP toward attainment of the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast air basin. These measures
include CMB-01 (``Transition to Zero and Near-Zero Emission
Technologies for Stationary Sources''), CMB-03 (``Emission Reductions
from Non-Refinery Flares''), ECC-02 (``Co-Benefits from Existing
Residential and Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Measures''), ECC-
03 (``Additional Enhancements in Reducing Residential Building Energy
Use'').\171\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\171\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As with NOX, the majority of VOC emission reductions
that occur between the 2012 base year and the 2022 RFP year come from
on-road mobile sources and other mobile sources that are under the
State's jurisdiction.
Ammonia
Control measures for ammonia sources are described in Appendix VI
of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. For example, South Coast Rule 223
and Rule 1127, which regulate confined animal facilities and manure
waste from these facilities, control ammonia, as do the District's
composting measures (i.e., Rule 1133, Rule 1133.1, Rule 1133.2 and Rule
1133.3). These rules and the methods they use to control ammonia
emissions are discussed at length in Appendix IV-A of the Plan, and
their emission projections are presented collectively under farming
operations (for confined animal feeding operations and manure) or waste
disposal (for composting categories) in the Plan's emissions
inventory.\172\ We discuss our evaluation of these rules for purposes
of satisfying RACM requirements in section V.D of this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\172\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, IV-A-98 to IV-A-103.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the control strategy for the 2016 PM2.5 Plan,
the District has committed to adopt and implement new or revised
control measures to reduce ammonia emissions in the South Coast air
basin. Potential measures include: (1) BCM-04 (``Emission Reductions
from Manure Management Strategies''), which would reduce ammonia from
fresh manure through acidifier application, dietary manipulation, feed
additives, and other manure control strategies, including potentially
lowering the threshold for large confined animal facilities under Rule
223; and (2) BCM-10 (``Emission Reductions from Greenwaste
Composting''), which would reduce ammonia through emerging organic
waste processing technology and potential restrictions on direct land
application of uncomposted greenwaste.\173\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\173\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Resolution No. 17-2 (March 3,
2017), 9 and 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table 4-7, identifying BCM-
04 and BCM-10 as new control measures to be implemented by 2020 for
PM2.5 purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District ascribes the projected reductions in ammonia during
the period from 2012 to 2022 to decreases in farming operations in the
South Coast air basin, reductions in emissions from mobile sources
largely achieved by State regulations for on-road motor vehicles, and
the District's commitments to adopt and implement new control measures
such as BCM-04 and BCM-10.\174\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\174\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III, Attachment A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sulfur Dioxide
Reductions of SO2 in the South Coast nonattainment area
during the period from 2012 to 2022 are mainly from mobile source
reductions. The majority of the SO2 reductions come from
non-road mobile sources, primarily reductions from state regulation of
ocean-going vessels.
Quantitative Milestones
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan identifies a milestone year of 2019,
which is 4.5 years after the effective date of the EPA's designation
and classification of the South Coast as a Moderate nonattainment area
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, and a second milestone year of
2022, which is 7.5 years after the effective date of the designation.
The Plan also identifies target RFP emission levels for direct
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia for
the 2019 milestone year and the 2022 post-attainment milestone
year,\175\ and emission reduction commitments to be achieved through
2022 in accordance with the control strategy in the Plan.\176\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\175\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, VI-C-9 and VI-C-10.
\176\ Id., Table VI-C-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan describes the adopted control
measures for direct PM2.5, NOX, SO2,
VOC, and ammonia implemented during each year of the plan and
demonstrates that these measures are being implemented as expeditiously
as practicable. Additionally, the Plan presents basin-wide emission
reduction commitments to attain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The
Plan contains projected RFP emission levels for direct PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors for the 2019 and 2022 milestone
years based on the anticipated implementation schedule for the control
strategy. Finally, the 2016 PM2.5 Plan demonstrates that, by
the end of the calendar year for each milestone date for the area,
emissions of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5
precursors will be reduced at rates representing generally linear
progress towards attainment.\177\ We agree with the State and
District's conclusion that generally linear progress is an appropriate
measure of RFP for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast
area given that PM2.5 and its precursors are emitted by a
large number and range of sources in the South Coast, the emission
reductions needed for these
[[Page 40047]]
pollutants are inventory-wide,\178\ and secondary particulates
contribute significantly to ambient PM2.5 levels in the
South Coast area.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\177\ In addition to the Moderate area plan and request for
reclassification to Serious, the 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes
a Serious area attainment demonstration for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS with a December 31, 2025 attainment date. The
RFP demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan represents
generally linear progress between the 2012 base year and projected
2025 attainment year in the Serious area plan. Given that the Plan
identifies December 31, 2025 as the most expeditious attainment date
for the area, we find this date to be an appropriate end point for
the RFP demonstration.
\178\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix IV-A, Appendix IV-B,
and Appendix VI-A.
\179\ Id. at V-6-61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the 2016 PM2.5 Plan identifies
quantitative milestone dates that are consistent with the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(4) and target emission levels for direct
PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors to be achieved by
these milestone dates through implementation of the control strategy.
These target emission levels and associated control requirements
provide for objective evaluation of the area's progress towards
attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
For all of these reasons, we propose to approve the RFP
demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2) and 40 CFR 51.1012(a) and to
determine that the quantitative milestones in the Plan satisfy the
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013.
On January 13, 2020, CARB submitted the ``2019 Quantitative
Milestone Report for the 2012 annual PM2.5 National Ambient
Air Qualtiy Standard (January 2020)'' (``2019 QM Report'') to the
EPA.\180\ The 2019 QM Report includes a certification from the
Governor's designee that the 2019 quantitative milestones for the South
Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area have been achieved and a
demonstration that the adopted control strategy has been fully
implemented. The 2019 QM Report also contains a demonstration of how
the emission reductions achieved to date compare to those required or
scheduled to meet RFP. The State and District conclude in the 2019 QM
Report that the emission reductions needed to demonstrate RFP have been
achieved and that the 2019 quantitative milestone has been met in the
South Coast. On March 30, 2020, the EPA determined that the South Coast
2019 QM Report was adequate.\181\ We invite the public to comment on
this determination of adequacy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\180\ Letter dated January 13, 2020, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, with enclosure.
\181\ Letter dated March 30, 2020, from Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator, EPA, to Richard W. Corey, Executive Officer, CARB,
regarding 2019 Quantitative Milestone Report for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Contingency Measures
1. Requirements for Contingency Measures
Under CAA section 172(c)(9), each SIP for a nonattainment area must
include contingency measures to be implemented if an area fails to meet
RFP (``RFP contingency measures'') or fails to attain the NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date (``attainment contingency measures''). Under
the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, PM2.5 attainment
plans must include contingency measures to be implemented following a
determination by the EPA that the state has failed: (1) To meet any RFP
requirement in the approved SIP; (2) to meet any quantitative milestone
in the approved SIP; (3) to submit a required quantitative milestone
report; or (4) to attain the applicable PM2.5 NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date.\182\ Section 189(b)(1)(A) of the CAA,
however, differentiates between attainment plans that provide for
timely attainment and those that demonstrate that attainment is
impracticable. Where a SIP includes a demonstration that attainment by
the applicable attainment date is impracticable, the state need only
submit contingency measures to be implemented if an area fails to meet
RFP, to meet a SIP-approved quantitative milestone, or to submit a
required quantitative milestone report.\183\ Contingency measures must
be fully adopted rules or control measures that are ready to be
implemented quickly upon failure to meet RFP or failure of the area to
meet the relevant NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.\184\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\182\ 40 CFR 51.1014(a).
\183\ The EPA does not interpret the requirement for failure-to-
attain contingency measures to apply to a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area that a state demonstrates cannot practicably
attain the NAAQS by the statutory attainment date. Rather, the EPA
believes it is appropriate for the state to identify and adopt
attainment contingency measures as part of the Serious area
attainment plan. 81 FR 58010, 58067 and Addendum, 42015.
\184\ 81 FR 58010, 58066 and Addendum, 42015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of contingency measures is to continue progress in
reducing emissions while a state revises its SIP to meet the missed RFP
requirement or to correct ongoing nonattainment. Neither the CAA nor
the EPA's implementing regulations establish a specific level of
emission reductions that implementation of contingency measures must
achieve, but the EPA recommends that contingency measures should
provide for emission reductions equivalent to approximately one year of
reductions needed for RFP, calculated as the overall level of
reductions needed to demonstrate attainment divided by the number of
years from the base year to the attainment year. In general, we expect
all actions needed to effect full implementation of the measures to
occur within 60 days after the EPA notifies the state of a failure to
meet RFP or to attain.\185\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\185\ 81 FR 58010, 58066. See also General Preamble, 13512,
13543-13544, and Addendum, 42014-42015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1014, the contingency
measures adopted as part of a PM2.5 attainment plan must
consist of control measures for the area that are not otherwise
required to meet other nonattainment plan requirements (e.g., to meet
RACM/RACT requirements) and must specify the timeframe within which
their requirements become effective following any of the EPA
determinations specified in 40 CFR 51.1014(a).
In a 2016 decision called Bahr v. EPA (``Bahr''),\186\ the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the EPA's interpretation of CAA
section 172(c)(9) to allow approval of already implemented control
measures as contingency measures. In Bahr, the Ninth Circuit concluded
that contingency measures must be measures that are triggered only
after the EPA determines that an area fails to meet RFP requirements or
to attain by the applicable attainment date, not before. Thus, within
the geographic jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, already implemented
measures cannot serve as contingency measures under CAA section
172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\186\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218, 1235-1237 (9th Cir. 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To comply with section 172(c)(9), as interpreted in the Bahr
decision, a state must develop, adopt, and submit a contingency measure
to be triggered upon a failure to meet an RFP milestone, failure to
meet a quantitative milestone requirement, or failure to attain the
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date regardless of the extent to
which already-implemented measures would achieve surplus emission
reductions beyond those necessary to meet RFP or quantitative milestone
requirements and beyond those predicted to achieve attainment of the
NAAQS.
2. Contingency Measures in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan addresses the contingency measure
requirement in Chapter 4 of the Plan and in section H of the CARB Staff
Report. Chapter 4 of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan addresses
contingency measures for failure to attain the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS by
[[Page 40048]]
describing emission reductions to be achieved by an adopted measure,
South Coast Rule 445 (``Wood-Burning Devices).\187\ The 2016
PM2.5 Plan does not specifically address contingency
measures for failure to meet RFP or quantitative milestone
requirements. The CARB Staff Report provides a brief statement
acknowledging the Bahr decision and committing to work with the EPA and
the District to provide additional documentation or develop any needed
SIP revisions consistent with that decision.\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\187\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, 4-51 to 4-52.
\188\ The SCAQMD and CARB adopted the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
in March and April 2017, shortly after the Ninth Circuit issued its
decision in Bahr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To supplement the contingency measure element of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, CARB submitted a letter dated January 29, 2019
enclosing the District's commitment to adopt a control measure by a
date certain for purposes of satisfying CAA contingency measure
requirements for the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\189\ By
letter dated February 12, 2020, the District clarified its commitment
by committing to develop, adopt, and submit to CARB, for submission to
the EPA, a revised rule containing specific contingency provisions that
would become effective if the EPA determines: (1) That the area failed
to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS or the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date; (2) that the
area failed to meet any RFP requirement; (3) that the area failed to
meet any quantitative milestone; or (4) that the State failed to submit
a required quantitative milestone report for the area.\190\ The
District submitted this clarified commitment, accompanied by a
technical analysis of the emission reductions to be achieved by the
contingency measure (``Technical Clarification''), to satisfy the
attainment contingency measure requirement for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and the RFP contingency measure requirement for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast nonattainment
area.\191\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\189\ Letter dated February 13, 2019, from Michael Benjamin, Air
Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Mike Stoker,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX (transmitting letter dated
January 29, 2019, from Wayne Nastri, Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to
Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB). In its January 29, 2019
letter, the District committed to modify an existing rule or adopt a
new rule to create a contingency measure that would be triggered if
the area fails to meet an RFP requirement, to submit a quantitative
milestone report, to meet a quantitative milestone, or to attain the
2006 24-hour or 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
\190\ Letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB
(attaching ``Technical clarification regarding emission reductions
associated with contingency measures for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard attainment and 2012 annual
PM2.5 standard Reasonable Further Progress,'' February
2020) (``Technical Clarification'').
\191\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the District has committed to revise an existing
rule, Rule 445 (``Wood Burning Devices''), to establish more stringent
requirements that would become effective if the EPA makes any of the
four determinations (i.e., ``findings of failure'') listed in 40 CFR
51.1014(a). The revisions are to lower the PM wood burning curtailment
threshold to 29 [micro]g/m\3\ upon the first EPA finding of failure,
and to lower the threshold to 28, 27, and 26 [micro]g/m\3\ upon a
second, third, and fourth finding of failure, respectively. Under the
revised rule, the mandatory winter burning curtailment would apply to
the entire South Coast air basin. The District estimates that lowering
the curtailment threshold to 29, 28, 27, and 26 [micro]g/m\3\ upon each
finding of failure would achieve reductions in PM2.5
emissions of 20.9, 20.9, 13.9, and 19.1 tpy, respectively.\192\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\192\ Technical Clarification, 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District has committed to adopt this revised rule and submit it
to CARB in time for CARB to submit the revised rule to the EPA by the
earlier of the following dates: (1) One year after the date of the
EPA's conditional approval of the contingency measures for the 2012
annual PM2.5 standard, or (2) 60 days after the date the EPA
makes a determination that the South Coast area has failed to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards but no later than one year
after the date of the EPA's conditional approval of the contingency
measures for these standards.\193\ In its March 3, 2020 letter
submitting the District's commitment to the EPA, CARB also committed to
submit the revised rule to the EPA by the earlier of these two
dates.\194\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\193\ Letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB.
\194\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael T. Benjamin,
Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Amy
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX
(transmitting letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
Section 172(c)(9) requires contingency measures to address
potential failure to achieve RFP milestones, failure to meet
requirements concerning quantitative milestones, and failure to attain
the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. For purposes of evaluating
the contingency measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, we
find it useful to distinguish between contingency measures to address
potential failure to achieve RFP milestones or to meet quantitative
milestone requirements (``RFP contingency measures'') and contingency
measures to address potential failure to attain the NAAQS (``attainment
contingency measures'').
2006 PM2.5 Serious Area Contingency Measure Requirements
The EPA previously approved those portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan that pertain to the requirements for implementing
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast, except for the
contingency measure component of the Plan.\195\ As part of that action,
the EPA found that, for purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
the requirement for RFP contingency measures was moot as applied to the
2017 milestone year because CARB and the District had demonstrated to
the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 quantitative milestones in the
plan had been met.\196\ The EPA took no action, however, with respect
to RFP contingency measures for the 2020 milestone year or attainment
contingency measures for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, the EPA
is now proposing to act on these outstanding components of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan for purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\195\ 84 FR 3305 (February 12, 2019).
\196\ Id. and 83 FR 49872, 49890 (October 3, 2018) (referencing
the EPA's September 7, 2018 adequacy determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The applicable quantitative milestone dates for the Serious area
plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS are December 31, 2017 and
December 31, 2020.\197\ We discuss below our evaluation of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and related State and District commitments for
compliance with the 2020 RFP and attainment contingency measure
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\197\ 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 PM2.5 Moderate Area Contingency Measure Requirements
Because we are proposing to approve the State's demonstration that
the South Coast area cannot practicably attain the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable Moderate area attainment date
of December 31, 2021, and to reclassify the area to Serious on this
basis, attainment contingency measures are not required as part of the
Moderate area plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Upon
reclassification of the South Coast area as a Serious area, California
will be required to adopt attainment contingency measures as part of
the Serious area attainment plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
[[Page 40049]]
With respect to the RFP contingency measure requirement for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, the applicable quantitative milestone
dates are October 15, 2019 and October 15, 2022. As explained in
section V.G.3 of this proposed rule, on January 13, 2020, CARB
submitted a quantitative milestone report demonstrating that the 2019
quantitative milestones in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan have been
achieved, and the EPA has determined that this milestone report is
adequate. Because the State and District have demonstrated that the
South Coast area has met its 2019 quantitative milestones, RFP
contingency measures for the 2019 milestone year are no longer needed.
The sole purpose of RFP contingency measures is to provide continued
progress if an area fails to meet its RFP or quantitative milestone
requirements. Failure to meet RFP or quantitative milestone
requirements for 2019 would have required California to implement RFP
contingency measures and, in certain cases, to revise the 2016
PM2.5 Plan to assure that the area would achieve the next
quantitative milestone (i.e., for 2022).\198\ In this case, however,
the 2019 QM Report demonstrates that actual emission levels in 2019
were consistent with the approved 2019 RFP milestone year targets for
direct PM2.5 and all precursor pollutants (NOX,
SO2, VOC, and ammonia) regulated in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan. Accordingly, RFP contingency measures for 2019
no longer have meaning or purpose, and the EPA proposes to find that
the requirement for them is now moot as applied to the South Coast. We
discuss below our evaluation of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and
related State and District commitments for compliance with the 2022 RFP
contingency measure requirement for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\198\ Under section 189(c)(3) of the CAA, if a state fails to
submit a required quantitative milestone report or the EPA
determines that the area has not met an applicable milestone, the
EPA must require the state, within nine months after such failure or
determination, to submit a plan revision that assures that the state
will achieve the next milestone (or attain the NAAQS, if there is no
next milestone) by the applicable date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State's Contingency Measure Commitment
The District and CARB have committed to develop, adopt, and submit
a revised District rule (Rule 445, ``Wood-Burning Devices'') to meet
the attainment contingency measure requirement for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and the RFP contingency measure requirement for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The specific revisions the District
has committed to make (i.e., increasing the stringency of the existing
wood burning curtailment provisions in Rule 445) would satisfy the
requirements in CAA section 172(c)(9) because they would be undertaken
if the area fails to attain or fails to meet an RFP or quantitative
milestone requirement, and would take effect without significant
further action by the State or the EPA. The revised rule would also
comply with the regulatory requirements in 40 CFR 51.1014 because it
would contain contingency provisions that take effect if the EPA makes
any of the four determinations listed in 40 CFR 51.1014(a), would
consist of control requirements not otherwise included in the control
strategy, and would specify the timeframe within which its contingency
provisions become effective following any of the determinations listed
in 40 CFR 51.1014(a).
We also considered the adequacy of the contingency measure (once
adopted and submitted) from the standpoint of the magnitude of emission
reductions the measure would provide (if triggered). Neither the CAA
nor the EPA's implementing regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS
establish a specific amount of emission reductions that implementation
of contingency measures must achieve, but we generally expect that
contingency measures should provide for emission reductions
approximately equivalent to one year's worth of RFP. For the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast, one year's worth of
reductions is approximately 0.36 of direct PM2.5 reductions,
26.68 tpd of NOX reductions, 0.26 tpd of SOX
reductions, 13.50 tpd of VOC reductions, and 1.02 tpd of ammonia
reductions.\199\ For the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, one year's worth
of reductions needed for RFP is approximately 0.18 tpd of direct
PM2.5 reductions, 25.71 tpd of NOX reductions,
0.08 tpd of SOX reductions, 10.33 tpd of VOC reductions, and
0.67 tpd of ammonia reductions.\200\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\199\ Technical Clarification, Table 1.
\200\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III, Attachment A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to attainment contingency measures for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, the Technical Clarification contains the
District's quantification of the expected emission reductions from the
strengthened requirements to be adopted as contingency measures in Rule
445. The District estimates that lowering the curtailment threshold in
Rule 445 by 1 [micro]g/m\3\ for each finding of failure (i.e., to 29,
28, 27, and 26 [micro]g/m\3\) would achieve additional reductions in
PM2.5 emissions of 20.9, 20.9, 13.9, and 19.1 tpy (0.06,
0.06, 0.04, and 0.05 tpd), respectively, in 2020, the year after the
attainment year for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\201\ Each of these
reduction levels alone do not achieve one year's worth of RFP. However,
the District's submittal provides the larger SIP planning context in
which to judge the adequacy of the to-be-submitted District contingency
measure by identifying surplus direct PM2.5, NOX,
VOC, and ammonia emission reductions estimated to be achieved in
2020.\202\ The surplus reflects already implemented regulations,
including vehicle turnover, which refers to the ongoing replacement by
individuals, companies, and government agencies of older, more
polluting vehicles and engines with newer vehicles and engines designed
to meet more stringent CARB mobile source emissions standards. The
surplus also reflects additional emission reductions from regulations
and programs that were adopted after the development of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan. These include CARB's Heavy-Duty Vehicle
Inspection Program, Periodic Smoke Inspection Program, and efforts to
reduce emissions from Ocean-Going Vessels At-Berth, and the District's
Airports Memorandum of Understanding, Metrolink Locomotives, Low Carbon
Fuel Standard and Alternative Diesel Fuels Regulation, and Airborne
Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Portable Engines and the Statewide
Portable Equipment Registration Program.\203\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\201\ Technical Clarification, 2-3.
\202\ These emission reductions are surplus to those relied upon
in the control strategy for attaining the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan because they occur after the
December 31, 2019 attainment date and/or will be achieved through
implementation of measures adopted after the Plan's adoption.
\203\ Technical Clarification, 2-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed the surplus emissions estimates for 2020, as shown
in the Technical Clarification, and find the calculations reasonable.
We therefore agree with the District's conclusion that the 2016
PM2.5 Plan provides surplus emission reductions beyond those
necessary to demonstrate attainment by the December 31, 2019 Serious
area attainment date for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South
Coast. While such surplus emission reductions in the year after the
2019 attainment year do not represent contingency measures themselves,
we consider them relevant in evaluating the adequacy of the contingency
measures that the State has committed to in order to meet the
requirements of section 172(c)(9). In light of the ongoing reductions
in emissions of direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and
ammonia achieved by the State and District measures identified in the
Technical Clarification, the emission
[[Page 40050]]
reductions from the District contingency measure (revised Rule 445)
would be sufficient to meet the attainment contingency measure
requirement for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, even though the
measure would achieve emission reductions lower than the EPA normally
recommends for reductions from such a measure.
With respect to RFP contingency measures for the 2022 milestone
year in the Moderate area plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, the
District similarly explains in the Technical Clarification that
continuing implementation of existing regulations and turn-over of
older vehicles and equipment to cleaner vehicles and equipment will
result in surplus emission reductions in the 2022 RFP milestone
year.\204\ In light of these ongoing reductions in emissions of direct
PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and ammonia, the District
contingency measure (revised Rule 445) would be sufficient to meet the
2022 RFP contingency measure requirement for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, even though the measure would not by itself achieve emission
reductions equivalent to one year's worth of RFP. For the same reasons,
the District contingency measure (revised Rule 445) would be sufficient
to meet the 2020 RFP contingency measure requirement for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. We note that under the proposed revisions to
Rule 445, if the EPA determines that the South Coast area has failed to
attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2019
attainment date and thereby triggers the contingency measure provision
to lower the mandatory burning curtailment to 29 [micro]g/m\3\, the
State would not be required to submit a new contingency measure because
the additional provisions to lower the curtailment threshold to 28, 27,
and 26 [micro]g/m\3\ could be triggered upon subsequent failures and
therefore would satisfy RFP contingency measure requirements for both
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\204\ Id. at 4-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, CARB has committed to submit the revised rule to the EPA
within one year after a final action conditionally approving the
contingency measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, or
within 60 days of a determination by the EPA that the South Coast area
failed to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date, whichever occurs sooner. Section 110(k)(4) of the Act
authorizes the EPA to conditionally approve a plan revision based on a
commitment by the state to adopt specific enforceable measures by a
date certain, but not later than one year after the date of approval of
the plan revision. The outermost deadline in CARB's commitment (one
year following conditional approval of the plan revision) is consistent
with the submission deadline in CAA section 110(k)(4). If, however, the
EPA determines that the South Coast area failed to attain the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (December 31,
2019), and the date 60 days after this determination is earlier than
the 1-year deadline under section 110(k)(4), then CARB would be
obligated under its commitment to submit the revised rule to the EPA by
the earlier date. These deadlines ensure that, should the EPA determine
that the South Coast area failed to timely attain the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, contingency provisions will take effect within
60 days of the determination, consistent with longstanding EPA
guidance.
For these reasons, we propose to conditionally approve the
contingency measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as
supplemented by commitments from the District and CARB to adopt and
submit an additional contingency measure to meet the attainment and RFP
contingency measure requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) for these
NAAQS. Our proposed approval is conditional because it relies upon
commitments to adopt and submit a specific enforceable contingency
measure (i.e., a revised District rule with contingent provisions).
I. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to conform to the SIP's goals of eliminating or
reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and
achieving timely attainment of the standards. Conformity to the SIP's
goals means that such actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute to
violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen the severity of an existing
violation, or (3) delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any interim
milestone.
Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to the
EPA's transportation conformity rule, codified at 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A. Under this rule, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs)
in nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with state and local
air quality and transportation agencies, the EPA, the FHWA, and the FTA
to demonstrate that an area's regional transportation plans and
transportation improvement programs conform to the applicable SIP. This
demonstration is typically done by showing that estimated emissions
from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or ``budgets'')
contained in all control strategy SIPs. An attainment, maintenance, or
RFP SIP should include budgets for the attainment year, each required
RFP milestone year, and the last year of the maintenance plan, as
appropriate. Budgets are generally established for specific years and
specific pollutants or precursors and must reflect all of the motor
vehicle control measures contained in the attainment and RFP
demonstrations.\205\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\205\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, each attainment
plan submittal for a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area must
contain quantitative milestones to be achieved no later than 4.5 years
and 7.5 years after the date the area was designated
nonattainment.\206\ The second of these milestone dates, October 15,
2022,\207\ falls after the attainment date for the South Coast area,
which is December 31, 2021. As the EPA explained in the preamble to the
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, it is important to include a
post-attainment year quantitative milestone to ensure that, if the area
fails to attain by the attainment date, the EPA can continue to monitor
the area's progress toward attainment while the state develops a new
attainment plan.\208\ Moderate area plans demonstrating that attainment
by the Moderate area attainment date is impracticable must, therefore,
include budgets for both of the milestone dates. States that submit
impracticability demonstrations for Moderate areas under CAA section
189(a)(1)(B)(ii), however, are not required to submit budgets for the
attainment year because the submitted SIP does not demonstrate
attainment.\209\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\206\ 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(1).
\207\ Because the South Coast area was designated nonattainment
effective April 15, 2015, the first milestone date is October 15,
2019, and the second milestone date is October 15, 2022. 80 FR 2206.
\208\ 81 FR 58010, 58058 and 58063-58064.
\209\ Id. at 58055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 plans should identify budgets for direct
PM2.5, NOX, and all other PM2.5
precursors for which on-road emissions are determined to significantly
contribute to PM2.5 levels in the area for each RFP
milestone year and the attainment year, if the plan demonstrates
attainment. All direct PM2.5 SIP budgets should include
direct PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions from
[[Page 40051]]
tailpipes, brake wear, and tire wear. With respect to PM2.5
from re-entrained road dust and emissions of VOC, SO2, and/
or ammonia, the transportation conformity provisions of 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A, apply only if the EPA Regional Administrator or the director
of the state air agency has made a finding that emissions of these
pollutants within the area are a significant contributor to the
PM2.5 nonattainment problem and has so notified the MPO and
Department of Transportation (DOT), or if the applicable implementation
plan (or implementation plan submission) includes any of these
pollutants in the approved (or adequate) budget as part of the RFP,
attainment, or maintenance strategy.\210\ Additionally, as the EPA
explained in its May 6, 2005 transportation conformity rule amendments
for the PM2.5 NAAQS, it is not necessary for a SIP to
explicitly state that VOC, SO2, and/or ammonia are
insignificant precursors. Instead, states should consider the on-road
contribution of all four precursors to the PM2.5 problem as
they develop their SIPs and establish emissions budgets for those
precursors for which on-road emissions need to be addressed in order to
attain the PM2.5 standard as expeditiously as practicable.
Conformity determinations must address all precursors for which the SIP
establishes a budget and need not address those precursors for which
the state has not established a budget because the emissions of that
precursor are insignificant.\211\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\210\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(3), 93.102(b)(2)(v), and 93.122(f); see
also Conformity Rule preambles at 69 FR 40004, 40031-40036 (July 1,
2004), 70 FR 24280, 24283-24285 (May 6, 2005) and 70 FR 31354 (June
1, 2005).
\211\ 70 FR 24280, 24287 (May 6, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By contrast, transportation conformity requirements apply with
respect to emissions of NOX unless both the EPA Regional
Administrator and the director of the state air agency have made a
finding that transportation-related emissions of NOX within
the nonattainment area are not a significant contributor to the
PM2.5 nonattainment problem and have so notified the MPO and
DOT, or the applicable implementation plan (or implementation plan
submission) does not establish an approved (or adequate) budget for
such emissions as part of the RFP, attainment, or maintenance
strategy.\212\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\212\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The criteria for insignificance determinations are provided in 40
CFR 93.109(f). In order for a pollutant or precursor to be considered
an insignificant contributor, the control strategy SIP must demonstrate
that it would be unreasonable to expect that such an area would
experience enough motor vehicle emissions growth in that pollutant/
precursor for a NAAQS violation to occur. Insignificance determinations
are based on factors such as air quality, SIP motor vehicle control
measures, trends and projections of motor vehicle emissions, and the
percentage of the total SIP inventory that is comprised of motor
vehicle emissions. The EPA's rationale for providing for insignificance
determinations is described in the July 1, 2004 revision to the
Transportation Conformity Rule.\213\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\213\ 69 FR 40004 (July 1, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's process for determining the adequacy of a budget consists
of three basic steps: (1) Notifying the public of a SIP submittal; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the budget during a
public comment period; and, (3) making a finding of adequacy or
inadequacy. The EPA can notify the public by either posting an
announcement that the EPA has received SIP budgets on the EPA's
adequacy website (40 CFR 93.118(f)(1)), or through a Federal Register
notice of proposed rulemaking when the EPA reviews the adequacy of an
implementation plan budget simultaneously with its review and action on
the SIP itself (40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)).
For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, the
EPA's adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). To meet these
requirements, the budgets must be consistent with the attainment and
RFP requirements and reflect all of the motor vehicle control measures
contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations.\214\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\214\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more
information on the transportation conformity requirements and
applicable policies on MVEBs, please visit our transportation
conformity website at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
The 2016 PM2.5 Plan includes budgets for direct
PM2.5, NOx, and VOC for 2019 and 2022 (RFP milestone year
and post-attainment quantitative milestone year, respectively).\215\
The budgets were calculated using EMFAC2014, the latest approved
version of the EMFAC model for estimating emissions from on-road
vehicles operating in California that was available at the time the
plan was prepared, and SCAG's latest modeled VMT and speed
distributions from the ``2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)'' adopted in April 2016.\216\ The
budgets reflect annual average emissions because those emissions are
linked with the District's RFP demonstration for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\215\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI-D and Table VI-D-
3.
\216\ See footnote 30, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The direct PM2.5 budgets include tailpipe, brake wear,
and tire wear emissions as well as paved road dust, unpaved road dust,
and road construction dust emissions.\217\ The Plan includes budgets
for NOx and VOC because they are regulated precursors under the Plan,
but the Plan does not include budgets for SO2 or ammonia.
The budgets included in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan are shown in
Table 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\217\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-D-3.
Table 8--MVEBs for the South Coast for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard
[Annual average tpd]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 (RFP year) 2022 (post attainment year)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX VOC PM2.5 NOX VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline emissions: Exhaust, brake 10.82 168.13 82.52 10.25 126.26 68.22
and tire wear....................
Paved road dust................... 8.15 ........... ........... 8.38 ........... ...........
Unpaved road dust................. 0.59 ........... ........... 0.59 ........... ...........
Road construction................. 0.25 ........... ........... 0.27 ........... ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 19.81 168.13 82.52 19.48 126.26 68.22
[[Page 40052]]
Conformity budget................. 20 169 83 20 127 69
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Table VI-D-3. Budgets are rounded up to the nearest whole number.
In the submittal letter for the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, CARB
requested that we limit the duration of our approval of the budgets to
the period before the effective date of the EPA's adequacy finding for
any subsequently submitted budgets.\218\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\218\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
We have evaluated the budgets in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
against our adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) as part of our
review of the budgets' approvability (see Table 10 in section IV of the
EPA's TSD for this proposal) and will complete the adequacy review
concurrent with our final action on the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. The
EPA is not required under its transportation conformity rule to find
budgets adequate prior to proposing approval of them.\219\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\219\ Under the Transportation Conformity regulations, the EPA
may review the adequacy of submitted MVEBs simultaneously with the
EPA's approval or disapproval of the submitted implementation plan.
40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information about SO2 and ammonia emissions
in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, we propose to find that it is not
necessary to establish MVEBs for transportation-related emissions of
SO2 and ammonia to attain the 2012 PM2.5 standard
in the South Coast. As discussed in the May 6, 2005 final
transportation conformity rule that addresses the requirements for
PM2.5 precursors,\220\ on-road emissions of SO2
and ammonia typically are a small portion of the total emissions for
these precursors. In the May 6, 2005 final rule, the EPA stated that
with adopted fuel regulations, projections of on-road emissions of
SO2 would be less than one percent of total SO2
emissions in 2020. This was based on an analysis of projected on-road
SO2 emissions in 372 counties that potentially could have
been designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS based on 1999-2001 air quality data.\221\ In the South Coast, on-
road emissions of SO2 and ammonia are projected to account
for approximately 10 and 18 percent of total SO2 and ammonia
emissions, respectively, in 2020.\222\ The projected contribution of
total SO2 emissions to PM2.5 concentrations in
the South Coast is in the range of 10 to 13 percent, and the projected
contribution of total ammonia emissions to PM2.5
concentrations in the area is in the range of 6 to 8 percent, in
2021.\223\ CARB implements stringent standards for sulfur content in
reformulated gasoline and diesel fuel,\224\ both of which effectively
limit the SO2 contribution from motor vehicles in the South
Coast. Given that transportation-related emissions of SO2 or
ammonia are not significant contributors to the nonattainment problem
in this area, it is not necessary for the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to
include SO2 or ammonia budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\220\ 70 FR 24280, 24283-24285.
\221\ Id. at 24283.
\222\ 2016 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III, Attachment A
(identifying 2020 total SOX emissions estimate of 16.67
tpd in the South Coast, of which 1.75 tpd (approximately 10 percent)
is attributed to on-road motor vehicles, and 2020 total ammonia
emissions estimate of 73.25 tpd, of which 13.21 tpd (approximately
18 percent) is attributed to on-road motor vehicles).
\223\ Id., Table V-6-6 (identifying projected 2021
PM2.5 annual design values by component species,
including SO4 and NH4).
\224\ California Code of Regulations, title 13, sections 2262
and 2282, 74 FR 33196, 33199 (July 10, 2009) (noting that CARB's
sulfur content standard for diesel fuel is more stringent than the
requirements of the federal ultra-low sulfur diesel program at 40
CFR 80.29), and 75 FR 26653 (May 12, 2010) (final rule approving
revisions to the California reformulated gasoline and diesel fuel
regulations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons discussed in section V.F of this proposed rule, we
are proposing to approve the State's demonstration that it is
impracticable to attain the 2012 PM2.5 standard in the South
Coast by the applicable Moderate area attainment date of December 31,
2021 and are proposing to reclassify the area as Serious. Because the
2016 PM2.5 Plan does not demonstrate attainment, we do not
address in this proposal any budgets for the Moderate area attainment
year of 2021.
For the reasons discussed in section V.G of this proposed rule, we
are proposing to approve the RFP demonstration in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan. The 2019 and 2022 budgets, as shown in Table 8
of this proposed rule, are consistent with applicable requirements for
RFP, are clearly identified and precisely quantified, and meet all
other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements including the
adequacy criteria in 93.118(e)(4) and (5). For these reasons, the EPA
proposes to approve the budgets listed in Table 8. We provide a more
detailed discussion in section IV of the TSD, which can be found in the
docket for today's action.
We have previously approved MVEBs for the 1997 and 2006 annual and
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.\225\ The budgets that the EPA is
proposing to approve apply only for purposes of the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS and would not affect the status of the
previously-approved budgets for the 1997 or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
and related trading mechanisms, which remain in effect for those
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\225\ 76 FR 69928, 69951 (November 9, 2011) and 84 FR 3305, 3307
(February 12, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In general, only budgets in approved SIPs can be used for
transportation conformity purposes. However, section 93.118(e) of the
transportation conformity rule allows budgets in a SIP submission to
apply for conformity purposes before the SIP submission is approved
under certain circumstances. First, there must not be any other
approved SIP budgets that have been established for the same year,
pollutant, and CAA requirement. Second, the EPA must find that the
submitted SIP budgets are adequate for transportation conformity
purposes. To be found adequate, the submission must meet the conformity
adequacy requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5).
The transportation conformity rule allows for replacement of
previously approved budgets by submitted MVEBs that the EPA has found
adequate, if the EPA has limited the duration of its prior approval to
the period before it finds replacement budgets adequate.\226\ However,
the EPA will consider a state's request to limit the duration of an
MVEB approval only if the request includes the following elements:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\226\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An acknowledgement and explanation as to why the budgets
under
[[Page 40053]]
consideration have become outdated or deficient;
A commitment to update the budgets as part of a
comprehensive SIP update; and
A request that the EPA limit the duration of its approval
to the period before the EPA finds new budgets to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes.\227\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\227\ See, e.g., 67 FR 69139 (November 15, 2002), limiting our
prior approval of MVEBs in certain California SIPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the submittal letter for the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, CARB
requested that we limit the duration of our approval of the budgets to
the period before the effective date of the EPA's adequacy finding for
any subsequently submitted budgets.\228\ In a letter dated March 3,
2020, CARB clarified their request to limit the budgets and included an
explanation as to why the budgets under consideration will become
outdated. In short, CARB has requested that we limit the duration of
the approval of the budgets because the EPA's approval of EMFAC2017
\229\ on August 15, 2019 has rendered the budgets outdated. CARB
explains that the budgets from the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, for
which we are proposing approval in today's action, will need to be
revised using EMFAC2017 within the transportation conformity grace
period established in our approval of EMFAC2017 to provide for a new
conformity determination for the South Coast regional transportation
plan and program. In addition, CARB states that, without the ability to
replace the budgets using the budget adequacy process, the benefits of
using the updated data may not be realized for a year or more after the
updated SIP (with the EMFAC2017-derived budgets) is submitted, due to
the length of the SIP approval process. We find that CARB's explanation
for limiting the duration of the approval of the budgets is appropriate
and provides us with a reasonable basis on which to limit the duration
of the approval of the budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\228\ See letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, 3.
\229\ EMFAC2017 updates vehicle mix and emissions data of the
previously approved version of the model, EMFAC2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We note that CARB has not committed to update the budgets as part
of a comprehensive SIP update, but as a practical matter, CARB must
submit a SIP revision that includes updated demonstrations as well as
the updated budgets to meet the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4); \230\ and thus, we do not need a specific commitment for
such a plan at this time. For the reasons provided above, and in light
of CARB's explanation for why the budgets will become outdated and
should be replaced upon an adequacy finding for updated budgets, we
propose to limit the duration of our approval of the budgets in the
2016 PM2.5 Plan until new budgets have been found adequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\230\ Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), the EPA will not find a budget
in a submitted SIP to be adequate unless, among other criteria, the
budgets, when considered together with all other emission sources,
are consistent with applicable requirements for RFP and attainment.
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Serious Area SIP
Requirements
A. Reclassification as Serious and Applicable Attainment Date
Section 188 of the Act outlines the process for classification of
PM2.5 nonattainment areas and establishes the applicable
attainment dates. Under the plain meaning of the terms of section
188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA has general authority to reclassify at
any time before the applicable attainment date any area that the EPA
determines cannot practicably attain the standard by such date.
Accordingly, section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of
delegated rulemaking authority. In addition, subparagraphs (A) and (B)
of section 188(b)(1) mandate that the EPA reclassify ``appropriate''
PM10 nonattainment areas at specified time frames (i.e., by
December 31, 1991 for the initial PM10 nonattainment areas,
and within 18 months after the SIP submittal due date for subsequent
nonattainment areas). These subparagraphs do not restrict the EPA's
general authority but simply specify that, at a minimum, it must be
exercised at certain times.\231\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\231\ For a general discussion of the EPA's interpretation of
the reclassification provisions in section 188(b)(1) of the Act, see
the General Preamble, 13537-13538.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed the air quality modeling and impracticability
demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and, based on our
review, agree with the District's conclusion that implementation of the
State/District's SIP control strategy, including RACM/RACT and
additional reasonable measures, is insufficient to bring the South
Coast into attainment by the December 31, 2021 Moderate area attainment
deadline. See sections V.C and V.F of this notice. In addition, we have
reviewed recent PM2.5 monitoring data for the South Coast
available in the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. These data
show that 24-hour PM2.5 levels in the South Coast continue
to be above 12 [micro]g/m\3\, the level of the 2012 PM2.5
standard, and the recent trends in the South Coast's annual
PM2.5 levels are not consistent with a projection of
attainment by the end of 2021.\232\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\232\ EPA, Design Value Spreadsheets,
``20200306_SouthCoastPM25Annual.xlsx'' and
``pm25_designvalues_20162018_final_12_03_19.xlsx.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is
proposing to reclassify the South Coast area from Moderate to Serious
nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard of 12 [micro]g/
m\3\, based on the EPA's determination that the South Coast area cannot
practicably attain the standard by the applicable attainment date of
December 31, 2021.
Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's
designation as nonattainment . . .'' The EPA designated the South Coast
area as nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard effective
April 15, 2015.\233\ Therefore, upon final reclassification of the
South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment area, the latest
permissible attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for
purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 standard in this area, will be
December 31, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\233\ 80 FR 2206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 188(e) of the Act, a state may apply to the EPA for a
single extension of the Serious area attainment date by up to 5 years,
which the EPA may grant if the state satisfies certain conditions.
Before the EPA may extend the attainment date for a Serious area under
section 188(e), the state must: (1) Apply for an extension of the
attainment date beyond the statutory attainment date; (2) demonstrate
that attainment by the statutory attainment date is impracticable; (3)
demonstrate that it has complied with all requirements and commitments
pertaining to the area in the implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the Administrator that the plan for the area
includes the most stringent measures that are included in the
implementation plan of any state or are achieved in practice in any
state, and can feasibly be implemented in the area; and (5) submit a
demonstration of attainment by the most expeditious alternative date
practicable.\234\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\234\ For a discussion of the EPA's interpretation of the
requirements of section 188(e), see Addendum, 42002; 65 FR 19964
(April 13, 2000) (proposed action on PM10 Plan for
Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 (July 25, 2002) (final action
on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); and Vigil v.
EPA, 366 F.3d 1025, amended at 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004)
(remanding EPA action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County,
Arizona but generally upholding the EPA's interpretation of CAA
section 188(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40054]]
B. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
Plans
Upon reclassification as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, California will be required to submit
additional SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory requirements that
apply to Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including the
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
The Serious area SIP elements that California will be required to
submit are as follows:
1. Provisions to assure that the best available control measures
(BACM),\235\ including best available control technology (BACT) for
stationary sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years
after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\235\ The EPA defines BACM as, among other things, the maximum
degree of emission reduction achievable for a source or source
category, which is determined on a case-by-case basis considering
energy, environmental, and economic impacts. (Addendum, 42010 and
42014). BACM must be implemented for all categories of sources in a
Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area unless the State
adequately demonstrates that a particular source category does not
contribute significantly to nonattainment of the PM2.5
standard. (Id. at 42011, 42012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2025, or where the state is seeking an extension of
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that
attainment by December 31, 2025 is impracticable and that the plan
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date
practicable and no later than December 31, 2030 (CAA sections
189(b)(1)(A), 188(c)(2), and 188(e));
3. plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP)
(CAA 172(c)(2));
4. quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every three
years until the area is redesignated attainment and that demonstrate
RFP toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
5. provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the
state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
6. a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
7. contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section
172(c)(9)); and
8. a revision to the NNSR program to lower the applicable ``major
stationary source'' \236\ thresholds from 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA
section 189(b)(3)) and to satisfy the subpart 4 control requirements
for major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors (CAA
section 189(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\236\ For any Serious area, the terms ``major source'' and
``major stationary source'' include any stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 70 tpy of PM10 (CAA
sections 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in section V.E of this proposed rule, California
submitted NNSR SIP revisions for the South Coast to address the subpart
4 NNSR requirements for Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas on
May 8, 2017, and the EPA conditionally approved these NNSR SIP
revisions on November 30, 2018.\237\ The State fulfilled the commitment
that provided the basis for the EPA's conditional approval of these
NNSR SIP revisions by submitting a revised version of Rule 1325
(``Federal PM2.5 New Source Review Program'') on April 24,
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\237\ 83 FR 61551 (establishing December 30, 2019 deadline for
the State to correct identified rule deficiencies). Previously, the
EPA fully approved NNSR SIP revisions from California to address the
NNSR requirements for Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
80 FR 24821 (May 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, reclassification of the South Coast area as Serious
nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard would lower the de
minimis threshold under the CAA's General Conformity requirements (40
CFR part 93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy for PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors.\238\ In this case, however,
reclassification would have no impact on the applicable General
Conformity de minimis thresholds, because the South Coast area is
already subject to the 70 tpy de minimis threshold for PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors as a result of the EPA's previous
action reclassifying the area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.\239\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\238\ 40 CFR 93.153(b), 81 FR 58010, 58126.
\239\ 81 FR 1514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Statutory Deadline for Submittal of the Serious Area Plan
For an area reclassified as a Serious nonattainment area before the
applicable attainment date under CAA section 188(b)(1), section
189(b)(2) requires the state to submit the required BACM provisions
``no later than 18 months after reclassification of the area as a
Serious Area'' and to submit the required attainment demonstration ``no
later than 4 years after reclassification of the area to Serious.''
Section 189(b)(2) establishes outer bounds on the SIP submission
deadlines as necessary or appropriate to assure consistency among the
required submissions and to implement the statutory requirements.
The Act provides the state with up to 18 months after final
reclassification of an area to Serious to submit the required BACM
provisions. Because an up-to-date emissions inventory serves as the
foundation for a state's BACM/BACT determination, the PM2.5
SIP Requirements Rule requires the state to submit the emissions
inventory required under CAA section 172(c)(3) within 18 months after
the effective date of final reclassification.\240\ Similarly, because
an effective evaluation of BACM/BACT measures requires evaluation of
the precursor pollutants that must be controlled to provide for
expeditious attainment in the area, if the state chooses to submit an
optional precursor insignificance demonstration to support a
determination to exclude a PM2.5 precursor from the required
control measure evaluations for the area, the EPA requires that the
state submit any such demonstration by this same date. An 18-month
timeframe for submission of these plan elements is consistent with both
the timeframe for submission of BACM/BACT provisions under CAA section
189(b)(2) and the timeframe for submission of subpart 1 plan elements
under section 172(b) of the Act.\241\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\240\ 81 FR 58010, 58077.
\241\ Section 172(b) requires the EPA to establish, concurrent
with nonattainment area designations, a schedule extending no later
than 3 years from the date of the nonattainment designation for
states to submit plans or plan revisions meeting the applicable
requirements of sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule also establishes a
specific deadline for submission of the attainment demonstration and
attainment-related plan elements following discretionary
reclassification, which is the earlier of (1) four years from the date
of reclassification, or (2) the end of the eighth calendar year after
designation.\242\ In this case, the earlier of these two dates will be
the end of the eighth calendar year after designation--i.e., December
31, 2023. The attainment-related plan elements required within the same
timeframe as the attainment demonstration are: (1) The RFP
demonstration required under section 172(c)(2); (2) the quantitative
milestones
[[Page 40055]]
required under section 189(c); (3) any additional control measures
necessary to meet the requirements of section 172(c)(6); and (4) the
contingency measures required under section 172(c)(9). Although section
189(b)(2) generally provides for up to four years after a discretionary
reclassification for the state to submit the required attainment
demonstration, given the timing of this reclassification action less
than two years before the Moderate area attainment date, it is
appropriate in this case for the EPA to establish an earlier SIP
submission deadline to assure timely implementation of the statutory
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\242\ 81 FR 58010, 58077.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule establishes a
regulatory requirement that the state submit revised NNSR program
requirements no later than 18 months after final reclassification.\243\
The Act does not specify a deadline for the state's submission of SIP
revisions to meet NNSR program requirements to lower the ``major
stationary source'' threshold from 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)) and to address the control requirements for major stationary
sources of PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 189(e)) \244\
following reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment
area as Serious nonattainment under subpart 4. Pursuant to the EPA's
gap-filling authority in CAA section 301(a) and to effectuate the
statutory control requirements in section 189 of the Act, the
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule requires the state to submit
these NNSR SIP revisions, as well as any necessary analysis of and
additional control requirements for major stationary sources of
PM2.5 precursors, no later than 18 months after the
effective date of final reclassification of the South Coast area as
Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard. This due
date will ensure that necessary control requirements for major sources
are established in advance of the required attainment demonstration. An
18-month timeframe for submission of the NNSR SIP revisions also aligns
with the statutory deadline for submission of BACM and BACT provisions
and the broader analysis of PM2.5 precursors for potential
controls on existing sources in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\243\ Id. at 58078.
\244\ Section 189(e) requires that the control requirements
applicable to major stationary sources of PM2.5 also
apply to major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors,
except where the state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that
such sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5
levels that exceed the standard in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, if we finalize our proposal to reclassify the South
Coast as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, California will be required to submit the emissions inventory
required under CAA section 172(c)(3), the BACM/BACT provisions required
under CAA section 189(b)(1)(B), and any NNSR SIP revisions required to
satisfy the requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS no later than 18 months after the effective
date of a final reclassification action. Additionally, California will
be required to submit the Serious area attainment demonstration and all
attainment-related plan elements no later than the end of the eighth
calendar year after designation--i.e., by December 31, 2023. We note
that the 2016 PM2.5 Plan submitted on April 27, 2017,
includes a Serious area attainment demonstration, an emissions
inventory, attainment-related plan elements, and BACM/BACT provisions,
which the EPA intends to evaluate and act on through subsequent
rulemakings, as appropriate.
VII. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country
When the South Coast area was designated nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, five Indian tribes were located within the
boundaries of the nonattainment area. These tribes include the Cahuilla
Band of Mission Indians of the Cahuilla Reservation, the Morongo Band
of Mission Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, the San Manuel Band of
Mission Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. At that time,
the main body of land belonging to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission
Indians of the Pechanga Reservation was expressly excluded from the
South Coast 2012 PM2.5 nonattainment area. However, since
designations, the tribe acquired the Meadowbrook parcel, which is
located approximately 30 miles northwest of the northern boundary of
the Reservation and is located within the 2012 PM2.5
nonattainment area.
We have considered the relevance of our proposal to reclassify the
South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5
standard for each tribe located within the South Coast area. We believe
that the same facts and circumstances that support the proposal for the
non-Indian country lands also support the proposal for reservation
areas of Indian country \245\ and any other areas of Indian country
where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has
jurisdiction located within the South Coast nonattainment area. The EPA
is therefore proposing to exercise our authority under CAA section
188(b)(1) to reclassify areas of Indian country geographically located
in the South Coast nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly
authorizes the EPA to reclassify a nonattainment area--including any
Indian country located within such an area--that the EPA determines
cannot practicably attain the relevant standard by the applicable
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\245\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to:
``(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the
issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way running through
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the
borders of the United States whether within the original or
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Directly-emitted PM2.5 and its precursor pollutants
(NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia) are emitted
throughout a nonattainment area and can be transported throughout that
nonattainment area. Therefore, boundaries for nonattainment areas are
drawn to encompass both areas with direct sources of the pollutant
problem as well as nearby areas in the same airshed. Initial
classifications of nonattainment areas are coterminous with, that is,
they match exactly, their boundaries. The EPA believes this approach
best ensures public health protection from the adverse effects of
PM2.5 pollution. Therefore, it is generally
counterproductive from an air quality and planning perspective to have
a disparate classification for a land area located within the
boundaries of a nonattainment area, such as the reservation areas of
Indian country contained within the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area. Violations of the 2012 PM2.5 standard,
which are measured and modeled throughout the nonattainment area, as
well as shared meteorological conditions, would dictate the same
conclusion. Furthermore, emissions increases in portions of a
PM2.5 nonattainment area that are left classified as
Moderate could counteract the effects of efforts to attain the standard
within the overall area because less stringent requirements would apply
in those Moderate portions relative to those that would apply in the
portions of the area reclassified to Serious.
Uniformity of classification throughout a nonattainment area is
thus a guiding principle and premise when an area is being
reclassified. In this
[[Page 40056]]
particular case, we are proposing to determine, based on the State's
demonstration and current ambient air quality trends, that the entire
South Coast nonattainment area, including all reservations areas of
Indian country and any other area located within the South Coast where
a tribe has jurisdiction, cannot practicably attain the 2012
PM2.5 standard by the applicable Moderate area attainment
date of December 31, 2021.
In light of the considerations outlined above that support
retention of a uniformly-classified PM2.5 nonattainment
area, and our proposal to find that it is impracticable for the area to
attain by the applicable attainment date, we propose to reclassify the
entire South Coast nonattainment area, including reservation areas of
Indian country and any other area of Indian country located within it
where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has
jurisdiction, as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5
standard.
Generally, the effect of reclassification is to lower the
applicable ``major source'' threshold for purposes of the NNSR program
and the Title V operating permit program from 100 tpy to 70 tpy,\246\
thus subjecting more new or modified stationary sources to these
requirements. Reclassification also lowers the de minimis threshold
under the CAA's General Conformity requirements from 100 tpy to 70
tpy.\247\ In this case, however, reclassification would not change the
``major source'' thresholds because, as a result of the EPA's January
2016 reclassification of the South Coast area as a ``Serious''
nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the area is
already subject to the 70 tpy major source threshold for Serious
PM2.5 nonattainment areas in CAA section 189(b)(3).\248\
Likewise, reclassification would have no impact on the applicable
General Conformity de minimis thresholds, because the South Coast area
is already subject to the 70 tpy de minimis threshold for
PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors as a result of the
EPA's previous reclassification of the area as Serious for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.\249\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\246\ CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B).
\247\ 40 CFR part 93, subpart B.
\248\ 81 FR 1514.
\249\ Id. and 40 CFR 93.153(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has contacted tribal officials to invite government-to-
government consultation on this rulemaking effort.\250\ The EPA
specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from
tribal officials. We note that although eligible tribes may seek EPA
approval of relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of the
affected tribes will be required to submit an implementation plan as a
result of this reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\250\ We sent letters dated January 22, 2020 to tribal officials
offering government-to-government consultation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Summary of Proposed Actions and Request for Public Comment
Under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is proposing to approve the
following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan submitted by
California to address the CAA's Moderate area planning requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast nonattainment area:
1. The 2012 base year emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
2. the reasonably available control measures/reasonably available
control technology demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C);
3. the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii);
4. the reasonable further progress demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2);
5. the quantitative milestones as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 189(c);
6. the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2019 and 2022 as shown
in Table 8 of this proposed rule because they are derived from an
approvable RFP demonstration and meet the requirements of CAA section
176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A; and
7. the SCAQMD's commitments to adopt and implement specific rules
and measures in accordance with the schedule provided in Chapter 4 of
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to achieve the emission reductions shown
therein, and to submit these rules and measures to CARB for transmittal
to the EPA as a revision to the SIP, as stated on page 9 of SCAQMD
Governing Board Resolution 17-2.
The EPA is also proposing to conditionally approve the contingency
measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Finally, pursuant to CAA section 188(b)(1), the EPA is proposing to
reclassify the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area,
including reservation areas of Indian country and any other area where
the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction
within the South Coast area, as Serious nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 standard based on the agency's determination that the
South Coast area cannot practicably attain the standard by the Moderate
area attainment date of December 31, 2021. Upon final reclassification
as a Serious area, California will be required to submit, within 18
months after the effective date of the reclassification, provisions to
assure that BACM shall be implemented no later than 4 years after the
date of reclassification. California will also be required to submit,
by December 31, 2023, a Serious area plan that satisfies the
requirements of part D of title I of the Act. This plan must include a
demonstration that the South Coast area will attain the 2012
PM2.5 standard as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2025, or by the most expeditious alternative date
practicable and no later than December 31, 2030, in accordance with the
requirements of CAA sections 189(b) and 188(e).
We note that the 2016 PM2.5 Plan submitted on April 27,
2017, includes a Serious area attainment demonstration, an emissions
inventory, attainment-related plan elements, and BACM/BACT provisions,
which the EPA intends to evaluate and act on through subsequent
rulemakings, as appropriate.
In addition, because the EPA is proposing to similarly reclassify
reservation areas of Indian country and any other area of Indian
country where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has
jurisdiction within the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area
as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard,
consistent with our proposed reclassification of the surrounding non-
Indian country lands, the EPA has invited consultation with interested
tribes concerning this issue. Although eligible tribes may seek the
EPA's approval of relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of the
affected tribes will be required to submit an implementation plan as a
result of this reclassification.
We will accept comments from the public on these proposals for the
next 30 days. The deadline and instructions for submission of comments
are provided in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of
this preamble.
IX. 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, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
[[Page 40057]]
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve, or
conditionally approve, state plans as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 the 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate
matter.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 5, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-12690 Filed 7-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P