[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 209 (Wednesday, October 28, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68268-68282]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22601]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0709; FRL-10015-58-Region 9]
Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California; Eastern
Kern; 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, or conditionally approve, all or portions of three state
implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act'') requirements for
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards'') in the Eastern Kern, California (``Eastern Kern'') ozone
nonattainment area. The three SIP revisions include the ``2017 Ozone
Attainment Plan For 2008 Federal 75 ppb 8-Hour Ozone Standard,'' the
Eastern Kern portion of the ``2018 Updates to the California State
Implementation Plan,'' and the ``Transportation Conformity Budget State
Implementation Plan Update for the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Attainment
Plan.'' In this action, the EPA refers to these submittals collectively
as the ``2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.'' The 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP
addresses certain nonattainment area requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, including the requirements for an emissions inventory,
attainment demonstration, reasonable further progress, reasonably
available control measures, contingency measures, among others; and
establishes motor vehicle emissions budgets. The EPA is proposing to
approve the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP as meeting all the applicable
ozone nonattainment area requirements except for the contingency
measure requirement, for which the EPA is proposing conditional
approval, and the reasonably available control measures and attainment
demonstration requirements, for which the EPA is deferring action at
this time. In addition, the EPA is beginning the adequacy process for
the updated motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2020 in the 2017
Eastern Kern Ozone SIP through this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Written comments must arrive on or before November 27, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0709 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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 (audio,
video, etc.) 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. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3963 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations, and SIPs
B. The Eastern Kern Ozone Nonattainment Area
C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for 2008 Ozone Nonattainment
Area SIPs
II. Submissions From the State of California To Address 2008 Ozone
Requirements in Eastern Kern
A. Summary of Submissions
B. CAA Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submission of
SIP Revisions
III. Evaluation of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
B. Emissions Statement
C. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstration
D. Contingency Measures
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
F. Other Clean Air Act Requirements Applicable to Serious Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations, and SIPs
Ground-level ozone pollution is formed from the reaction of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) in the presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants,
referred to as ozone precursors, are emitted by many types of sources,
including on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State of California refers to reactive organic gases
(ROG) rather than VOC in some of its ozone-related SIP submissions.
ROG and VOC refer essentially to the same set of chemical
constituents, and for the sake of simplicity, we refer to this set
of gases as VOC in this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects
occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in children and adults
with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which can increase
[[Page 68269]]
respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Fact Sheet--2008 Final Revisions to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' dated March 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA promulgates NAAQS for
pervasive air pollutants, such as ozone. The NAAQS are concentration
levels that, the attainment and maintenance of which, the EPA has
determined to be requisite to protect public health and welfare.
Section 110 of the CAA requires states to develop and submit SIPs to
implement, maintain, and enforce the NAAQS.
In 2008, the EPA lowered the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per
million (ppm) (referred to herein as the ``2008 ozone NAAQS'') to
replace the 1997 ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.\3\ Effective July 20, 2012,
the EPA established initial area designations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
The EPA designated and classified the Eastern Kern portion of Kern
County, California,\4\ as a ``Marginal'' nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.\5\ For Marginal ozone nonattainment areas, the
attainment date for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is as expeditious as
practicable but not later than three years from the effective date of
designation, i.e., not later than July 20, 2015.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). In terms of parts per billion
(ppb), the 2008 ozone NAAQS is 75 ppb. The EPA further tightened the
8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm in 2015 (``2015 ozone NAAQS''), but
this proposed action relates to the requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. Information on the 2015 ozone NAAQS is available at 80 FR
65292 (October 26, 2015).
\4\ Kern County is located in the southern-most portion of
California's Central Valley. The western half of Kern County is part
of the San Joaquin Valley air basin and is included within the San
Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area. The eastern half of Kern
County is part of the Mojave Desert air basin. The Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment area covers the eastern half of the County,
excluding Indian Wells Valley. For more detail on the boundaries of
the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area, see the 2008 ozone table
in 40 CFR 81.305.
\5\ 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
\6\ 40 CFR 51.1103(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 181(b)(2), the EPA is required to determine
whether an area attained the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date, and in May 2016, the EPA found that Eastern Kern had failed to
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable Marginal attainment date
(i.e., July 20, 2015) and reclassified the area as ``Moderate.'' \7\
For Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, the attainment date is as
expeditious as practicable but not later than July 20, 2018.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016).
\8\ 40 CFR 51.1103(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the reclassification to Moderate, the Eastern Kern
Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD or ``District'') began to
develop an ozone plan meeting the applicable ozone nonattainment area
requirements, such as an attainment demonstration.\9\ However, in light
of the attainment demonstration needs for the area, the EKAPCD
developed the ``2017 Ozone Attainment Plan for the 2008 Federal 75 ppb
8-Hour Ozone Standard'' (``Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan''), to meet
``Serious,'' rather than Moderate, ozone nonattainment requirements,
including a base year emissions inventory, emissions statement element,
RFP demonstration, attainment demonstration, and a contingency measure
element. The Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan also includes a request to
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to formally submit a request
to the EPA asking for voluntary reclassification of the Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Under California law, the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) is the state agency that is responsible for the adoption and
submission to the EPA of California SIPs and SIP revisions, and it
has broad authority to establish emissions standards and other
requirements for mobile sources. Local and regional air pollution
control districts in California are responsible for the regulation
of stationary sources and are generally responsible for the
development of regional air quality plans. In Eastern Kern, EKAPCD
develops and adopts air quality management plans to address CAA
planning requirements applicable to that area. Such plans are then
submitted to CARB for adoption and submittal to the EPA as revisions
to the California SIP.
\10\ See page vi of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 27, 2017, the EKAPCD adopted the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan and transmitted the plan to CARB for approval and submittal to the
EPA. Through Resolution 17-25 (dated September 28, 2017), CARB adopted
the plan and the EKAPCD's request for voluntary reclassification. On
October 25, 2017, CARB submitted the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan to
the EPA as a revision to the California SIP. CARB's October 25, 2017
SIP revision submittal constitutes a request for reclassification of
the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area. In 2018, the EPA approved
the reclassification of the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area from
Moderate to Serious.\11\ The SIP revisions that are the subject of this
proposed action address certain Serious nonattainment area requirements
that apply to Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 83 FR 31334 (July 5, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Eastern Kern Ozone Nonattainment Area
Eastern Kern is located on the western edge of the Mojave Desert,
separated from populated valleys and coastal areas to the west and
south by several mountain ranges. Ozone and its precursor emissions
transported from these valleys and coastal areas are the major factor
affecting ozone exceedances \12\ in the nonattainment area. The
nonattainment area itself covers approximately 3,100 square miles and
has a population of approximately 100,000.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In this context, ``exceedances'' refer to daily maximum 8-
hour average concentrations that are greater than the level of the
standard (i.e., greater than 0.075 ppm).
\13\ See Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, H-8; area (566 square
miles) and population (33,000) for Indian Wells Valley were
subtracted from the District-wide values on page H-8 to estimate the
area and population of the ozone nonattainment area. Indian Wells
Valley information is from EKAPCD, Indian Wells Valley Second 10-
Year PM10 Maintenance Plan (May 7, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The surrounding mountain ranges contain a limited number of passes
that serve as transport corridors.\14\ The mountain passes include
Tehachapi Pass, connecting the western Mojave Desert to the southern
San Joaquin Valley, and Soledad Pass and Cajon Pass connecting to the
South Coast Air Basin. Eastern Kern is primarily influenced by
transport through the Tehachapi Pass corridor with some influence
through Soledad Pass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, p. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area
SIPs
States must implement the 2008 ozone NAAQS under title I, part D of
the CAA, including sections 171-179B of subpart 1 (``Nonattainment
Areas in General'') and sections 181-185 of subpart 2 (``Additional
Provisions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas''). To assist states in
developing effective plans to address ozone nonattainment problems, in
2015, the EPA issued a SIP Requirements Rule (SRR) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (``2008 Ozone SRR'') that addressed implementation of the 2008
standards, including attainment dates, requirements for emissions
inventories, attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP)
demonstrations, among other SIP elements, as well as the transition
from the 1997 ozone NAAQS to the 2008 ozone NAAQS and associated anti-
backsliding requirements.\15\ The 2008 Ozone SRR is codified at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart AA. We discuss the CAA and regulatory requirements for
the elements of 2008
[[Page 68270]]
ozone plans relevant to this proposal in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's 2008 Ozone SRR was challenged, and on February 16, 2018,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (``D.C. Circuit'')
published its decision in South Coast Air Quality Management District
v. EPA \16\ (``South Coast II'') \17\ vacating portions of the 2008
Ozone SRR. The only aspect of the South Coast II decision that affects
this proposed action is the vacatur of the alternative baseline year
for RFP plans. More specifically, the 2008 Ozone SRR required states to
develop the baseline emissions inventory for RFP plans using the
emissions for the most recent calendar year for which states submit a
triennial inventory to the EPA under subpart A (``Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements'') of 40 CFR part 51, which was 2011. However,
the 2008 Ozone SRR allowed states to use an alternative year, between
2008 and 2012, for the baseline emissions inventory provided that the
state demonstrated why the alternative baseline year was appropriate.
In the South Coast II decision, the D.C. Circuit vacated the provisions
of the 2008 Ozone SRR that allowed states to use an alternative
baseline year for demonstrating RFP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 882
F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (``South Coast II'').
\17\ The term ``South Coast II'' is used in reference to the
2018 court decision to distinguish it from a decision published in
2006 also referred to as ``South Coast.'' The earlier decision
involved a challenge to the EPA's Phase 1 implementation rule for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v.
EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Submissions From the State of California To Address 2008 Ozone
Requirements in Eastern Kern
A. Summary of Submissions
In this document, we are proposing action on all or portions of
three SIP revisions, which are described in detail in the following
paragraphs. Collectively, we refer to the relevant portions of the
three SIP revisions as the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.
1. EKAPCD's Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
On October 25, 2017, CARB submitted the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan to the EPA as a revision to the California SIP.\18\ The Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan addresses certain nonattainment area requirements
for Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. More specifically, the
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan includes a base year emissions
inventory,\19\ reasonably available control measure (RACM)
demonstration, RFP demonstration, attainment demonstration, contingency
measures, motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or ``budgets'') for
years 2017 and 2020 and addresses the emissions statement requirement.
The appendices to the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan provide
documentation for the emissions inventories, RACM demonstrations for
mobile sources and consumer products, and the photochemical modeling
conducted in support of the attainment demonstration. Further support
for the attainment demonstration is provided in ``Staff Report, CARB
Review of the Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District 2017 Ozone
Attainment Plan for 2008 Federal 75 ppb 8-Hour Ozone Standard'' (``CARB
Staff Report''), including a weight of evidence analysis in Appendix A.
The October 25, 2017 SIP submittal of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
was accompanied by public process documentation at both the District
and state levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Letter dated October 25, 2017, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX.
\19\ The 2012 base year emissions inventory in the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan supersedes and replaces a previous submittal of the
2012 base year emissions inventory for Eastern Kern in the ``8-Hour
Ozone State Implementation Plan Emission Inventory Submittal'' (the
``Multi-Area Emission Inventory''). The Multi-Area Emission
Inventory was submitted by CARB on July 17, 2014 and included 2012
base year emissions inventories for 16 nonattainment areas,
including Eastern Kern. Relative to the corresponding inventory for
Eastern Kern in the Multi-Area Emission Inventory, the 2012 base
year emissions inventory in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
reflects updated stationary, area, and nonroad source calculations
as well as an updated version of the EMFAC model for on-road motor
vehicle estimates. On December 18, 2019, CARB withdrew the earlier
submitted 2012 base year emissions inventory for Eastern Kern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since submittal of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, CARB has
replaced or supplemented certain elements of the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan, including the RFP demonstration, the 2020 budgets, and the
contingency measure element, as discussed further below. In this
document, we are proposing action on all the elements of the Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, except for the RFP demonstration, which has been
withdrawn, and the RACM and attainment demonstrations for which we are
deferring action at this time.
2. CARB's 2018 Updates to the California State Implementation Plan
On December 5, 2018, CARB submitted the ``2018 Updates to the
California State Implementation Plan'' (``2018 SIP Update'') to the EPA
as a revision to the California SIP.\20\ CARB adopted the 2018 SIP
Update on October 25, 2018. CARB developed the 2018 SIP Update in
response to the court's decision in South Coast II vacating the 2008
Ozone SRR with respect to the use of an alternate baseline year for
demonstrating RFP and to provide additional information pertaining to
the contingency measure requirement in the wake of the court decision
in Bahr v. EPA.\21\ The 2018 SIP Update includes an RFP demonstration
using the required 2011 baseline year for Eastern Kern for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.\22\ The RFP demonstration in the 2018 SIP Update for
Eastern Kern supersedes and replaces the RFP demonstration in the
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Letter dated December 5, 2018, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
\21\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 2016) (``Bahr v.
EPA''). In Bahr v. EPA, the court rejected the EPA's longstanding
interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9) as allowing for early
implementation of contingency measures. The court concluded that a
contingency measure must take effect at the time the area fails to
make RFP or attain by the applicable attainment date, not before.
\22\ Chapter IV (``SIP Elements for Eastern Kern County'') of
the 2018 SIP Update, section IV.B.
\23\ In a letter dated December 18, 2019, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator,
Region 9, CARB withdrew the RFP demonstration in the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2018 SIP Update also includes supplemental information
developed to support the approval of the contingency measure element of
the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.\24\ More recently, the District and
CARB have further supplemented the contingency measure element through
commitments made in letters submitted to the EPA. In its letter, the
District commits to modify at least one specific existing rule to
create a contingency measure that will be triggered if the area fails
to meet an RFP milestone or to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date and to transmit the rule or rules, as
amended, to CARB for submittal to the EPA.\25\ In its letter, CARB
commits to submit the revised District rule or rules to the EPA as a
SIP revision within 12 months of the EPA's final conditional approval
of the contingency measure
[[Page 68271]]
element of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Chapter IV (``SIP Elements for Eastern Kern County'') of
the 2018 SIP Update, section IV.C.
\25\ Letter dated September 1, 2020, from Glen E. Stephens,
EKAPCD Air Pollution Control Officer, to Richard Corey, CARB
Executive Officer, included as an attachment to a letter dated
September 18, 2020, from Richard W. Corey, CARB Executive Officer,
to John Busterud, EPA Region IX Regional Administrator.
\26\ Letter dated September 18, 2020, from Richard W. Corey,
CARB Executive Officer, to John Busterud, EPA Region IX Regional
Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2018 SIP Update includes updates for 8 different California
ozone nonattainment areas. We have already taken action to approve the
Coachella Valley, Imperial County, San Joaquin Valley, South Coast, and
Ventura County portions of the 2018 SIP Update.\27\ In this document,
we are proposing action on the Eastern Kern portion of the 2018 SIP
Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 84 FR 11198 (March 25, 2019) (final approval of the San
Joaquin Valley portion of the 2018 SIP Update), 84 FR 52005 (October
1, 2019) (final approval of the South Coast portion of the 2018 SIP
Update), 85 FR 11817 (February 27, 2020) (final approval of the
Imperial County portion of the 2018 SIP Update), 85 FR 11814
(February 27, 2020) and 85 FR 38081 (June 25, 2020) (final approvals
of the Ventura County portion of the 2018 SIP Update), and 85 FR
57714 (September 16, 2020) (final approval of the Coachella Valley
portion of the 2018 SIP Update).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Revised Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 2020
On August 31, 2020, CARB submitted the ``Transportation Conformity
Budget State Implementation Plan Update for the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Attainment Plan'' (``2020 Conformity Budget Update'') to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP.\28\ CARB adopted the Revised 2020
Budgets on July 23, 2020. The 2020 Conformity Budget Update includes
revised 2020 budgets for VOC and NOX for the Eastern Kern
nonattainment area and a demonstration showing consistency between the
revised budgets and the RFP demonstration in the 2018 SIP Update. The
revised 2020 budgets supersede the 2020 budgets from the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Submitted electronically on August 31, 2020 as an
attachment to a letter dated August 25, 2020, from Richard Corey,
CARB Executive Officer, to John Busterud, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. CAA Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submission of SIP
Revisions
Sections 110(a) and 110(l) of the CAA require a state to provide
reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submission of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet this
requirement, every SIP submittal 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 have satisfied the applicable statutory
and regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of the SIP revisions that comprise
the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP. With respect to the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan, the District provided a public review period exceeding 30
days for the draft Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan. On June 22, 2017, the
District gave notice in local newspapers \29\ of a 30-day public review
period for draft Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan and notice of a public
hearing to be held on July 27, 2017, for the adoption of the Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan. On July 27, 2017, the District's Air Pollution
Control Board held the public hearing, adopted the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan, and directed staff to forward it to CARB for inclusion in
the California SIP.\30\ No public comments were received during the
notice period or at the public hearing.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The Bakersfield Californian, The Tehachapi News, and the
Daily Independent published the notices on June 22, 2017, June 28,
2017, and June 23, 2017, respectively.
\30\ EKAPCD Board Resolution 2017-001-07.
\31\ Letter dated August 3, 2017, from Glen E. Stephens, EKAPCD
Air Pollution Control Officer, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB also provided public notice and opportunity for public comment
on the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan. On August 25, 2017, CARB released
for public review its Staff Report for the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
and gave notice of public meeting to be held on September 28, 2017, to
consider adoption of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.\32\ On September
28, 2017, CARB held the hearing, adopted the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan as a revision to the California SIP, and directed the Executive
Officer to submit the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan to the EPA for
approval into the California SIP.\33\ No public comments were received
during the notice period or at the public hearing.\34\ On October 25,
2017, the Executive Officer of CARB submitted the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the 2017 Ozone
Attainment Plan for the Eastern Kern Nonattainment Area, dated
August 17, 2017, and signed by Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB. CARB also posted the public notice on its website on August
25, 2017.
\33\ CARB Resolution 17-25.
\34\ Letter dated October 25, 2017, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, and enclosed completeness checklist
for Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the 2018 SIP Update, CARB also provided public
notice and opportunity for public comment. On September 21, 2018, CARB
released for public review the 2018 SIP Update and published a notice
of public meeting to be held on October 23, 2018, to consider adoption
of the 2018 SIP Update.\35\ On October 23, 2018, CARB adopted the 2018
SIP Update.\36\ On December 5, 2018, CARB submitted the 2018 SIP Update
to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the 2018 Updates to
the California State Implementation Plan signed by Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, September 21, 2018.
\36\ CARB Resolution 18-50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the 2020 Conformity Budget Update, CARB provided
public notice and opportunity for public comment. On June 19, 2020,
CARB released for public review the draft 2020 Conformity Budget Update
and published a notice of public meeting to be held on July 23, 2020,
to consider adoption of the revised 2020 budgets.\37\ On July 23, 2020,
CARB adopted the 2020 Conformity Budget Update,\38\ and on August 31,
2020, CARB submitted it to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Eastern Kern
Conformity Budget Update signed by Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB, June 19, 2020.
\38\ CARB Resolution 20-20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on information provided in each of the SIP revisions
summarized above, we find that the submittals of the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan, the 2018 SIP Update, and the 2020 Conformity Budget Update
meet the procedural requirements for public notice and hearing in CAA
sections 110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102.
III. Evaluation of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) require states to submit for
each ozone nonattainment area a ``base year inventory'' that is a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the area. In
addition, the 2008 Ozone SRR requires that the inventory year be
selected consistent with the baseline year for the RFP demonstration,
which is the most recent calendar year for which a complete triennial
inventory is required to be submitted to the EPA under the Air
Emissions Reporting Requirements.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 2008 Ozone SRR at 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and the Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements at 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has issued guidance on the development of base year and
future year emissions inventories for ozone and other pollutants.\40\
Emissions
[[Page 68272]]
inventories for ozone must include emissions of VOC and NOX
and represent emissions for a typical ozone season weekday.\41\ States
should include documentation explaining how the emissions data were
calculated. In estimating mobile source emissions, states should use
the latest emissions models and planning assumptions available at the
time the SIP is developed.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA-454/B-17-002, May 2017.
At the time that the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan was developed, the
following EPA emissions inventory guidance applied: ``Emissions
Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional
Haze Regulations,'' EPA-454-R-05-001, August 2005.
\41\ 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and (c), and 40 CFR 51.1100(bb) and (cc).
\42\ 80 FR 12264, at 12290 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future baseline emissions inventories must reflect the most recent
population, employment, travel and congestion projections for the area.
In this context, future ``baseline'' emissions inventories refer to
emissions estimates for a given year and area that reflect rules and
regulations and other measures that are already adopted and that take
into account expected growth. Future baseline emissions inventories are
necessary to show the projected effectiveness of SIP control measures.
Both the base year and future year inventories are necessary for
photochemical modeling to demonstrate attainment.
2. Summary of State's Submission
The Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan includes base year (2012) and
future year baseline inventories for NOX and VOC for the
Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area. Documentation for the
inventories is found in Chapter V (``Summary of Emissions Inventory''),
Chapter VI (``Emissions Inventories''), and Appendix A of the Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan. The emissions inventories represent average
summer day emissions, consistent with the observation that ozone levels
in Eastern Kern are typically higher from May through October. The 2012
base year and future year inventories in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan reflect District rules adopted prior to December 2015 and CARB
rules adopted prior to December 2014.\43\ The mobile source portions of
both base year and projected future year inventories were developed
using California's EPA-approved mobile source emissions model,
EMFAC2014, for estimating on-road motor vehicle emissions.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Email dated May 18, 2020, from Christine Suarez-Murias,
CARB, to John Ungvarsky, EPA Region 9. Also See 2018 SIP Update, A-
2.
\44\ EMFAC is short for EMission FACtor. In December 2015, the
EPA approved EMFAC2014 for SIP development and transportation
conformity purposes in California. 80 FR 77337 (December 14, 2015).
EMFAC2014 was the most recently approved version of the EMFAC model
that was available at the time of preparation of the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan. On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved an updated
version of the EMFAC model, EMFAC2017, for future SIP development
and transportation purposes in California. See 84 FR 41717.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions estimates of VOC and NOX in the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan are grouped into the following source categories:
stationary, area-wide, on-road motor vehicles, and other mobile (off-
road). Stationary sources refer to larger point sources that are
subject to District permits and have a fixed geographic location, such
as power plants, industrial engines, and oil storage tanks. Area-wide
sources are dispersed over a wide geographic area and include sources
such as consumer products and architectural coatings. The emissions
inventories for the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan account for smaller
permitted stationary sources in the area-wide source categories. The
mobile source category is divided into on-road and off-road sources.
The on-road sources include such vehicles as light-duty automobiles,
light-, medium-, and heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles. Off-road
sources include such vehicles as aircraft, recreational boats, and off-
road equipment.
For the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, stationary point source
emissions for the 2012 base year emissions inventory are based on
reported data from facilities using the District's annual emissions
reporting program, which applies under District Rule 108.2 (``Emission
Statement Requirements'') to all stationary sources in Eastern Kern
that emit more than 25 tons per year (tpy) or more of VOC or
NOX. Area sources include smaller emissions sources
distributed across the nonattainment area. CARB and the District
estimate emissions for area sources using established inventory
methods, including publicly-available emission factors and activity
information. Area source methodologies are described in Chapter V of
the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan. To improve and update the emissions
inventory, District staff evaluate the data and methods used on an
annual basis. CARB and District staff coordinate the update process
through the State's Emissions Inventory Technical Advisory Committee.
On-road emissions inventories in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
are calculated using CARB's EMFAC2014 model and vehicle and travel
activity data from the California Department of Motor Vehicles and the
Kern Council of Governments (COG).\45\ CARB uses a suite of models to
estimate emissions for off-road equipment categories or, where a new
model was not available, the OFFROAD2007 model.\46\ CARB provided
emissions inventories for off-road equipment, including construction
and mining equipment, industrial and commercial equipment, lawn and
garden equipment, agricultural equipment, locomotives, and recreational
vehicles. Aircraft, locomotive, and recreational boat emissions were
allocated based on District estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, Kern COG,
local adoption on September 15, 2016 and federal adoption on
December 16, 2016. Available at https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2017_FTIPWamend1to19.pdf.
\46\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 of this document provides a summary of the 2012 base year
emissions estimates in tons per day (tpd) (average summer day) for VOC
and NOX. Based on the inventory for 2012, mobile sources are
the predominant sources to county-wide VOC emissions, whereas
stationary point sources are the predominant sources of NOX
emissions.
Table 1--Eastern Kern 2012 Base Year Emissions Inventory
[Summer planning inventory, tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012
Category -------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary.............................. 0.94 16.67
Area Sources............................ 1.12 0.12
On-Road Mobile Sources.................. 2.42 7.61
Other (Off-Road) Mobile Sources......... 3.91 6.10
[[Page 68273]]
ERCs.................................... .............. ..............
-------------------------------
Total for Eastern Kern Nonattainment 8.39 30.50
Area...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, Appendix A, Table A-1, and
Appendix D.
Following the South Coast II decision, CARB submitted the 2018 SIP
Update to the EPA to, among other things, revise the RFP demonstration
in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan based on a 2011 RFP baseline year
(i.e., rather than 2012). Our analysis of the emissions inventories for
the 2011 RFP baseline year and RFP milestone years 2017 and 2020 can be
found in section III.C below.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
We have reviewed the 2012 base year emissions inventory in the
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan and the inventory methodologies used by
the District and CARB for consistency with CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. First, as required by EPA regulation, we find that the 2012
inventory includes estimates for VOC and NOX for a typical
ozone season weekday, and that CARB has provided adequate documentation
explaining how the emissions are calculated. Second, we find that the
2012 base year emissions inventory in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
reflects appropriate emissions models and methodologies, and,
therefore, represents a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory
of actual emissions during that year in the Eastern Kern nonattainment
area. Third, we find that selection of year 2012 for the base year
emissions inventory is appropriate because it is consistent with the
2011 RFP baseline year (from the 2018 SIP Update) because both
inventories are derived from a common set of models and methods.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to approve the 2012 emissions inventory
in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan as meeting the requirements for a
base year inventory set forth in CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1115.
B. Emissions Statement
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act requires states to submit a SIP
revision requiring owners or operators of stationary sources of VOC or
NOX to provide the state with statements of actual emissions
from such sources. Statements must be submitted at least every year and
must contain a certification that the information contained in the
statement is accurate to the best knowledge of the individual
certifying the statement. Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act allows
states to waive the emissions statement requirement for any class or
category of stationary sources that emit less than 25 tpy of VOC or
NOX, if the state provides an inventory of emissions from
such class or category of sources as part of the base year or periodic
inventories required under CAA sections 182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3)(A),
based on the use of emission factors established by the EPA or other
methods acceptable to the EPA.
The 2008 Ozone SRR provides that nonattainment areas are subject to
the requirements of subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA that
apply for that area's classification.\47\ For all areas classified
under subpart 2, the emissions statement requirement under CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(i) applies. The preamble of the 2008 Ozone SRR states that
if an area has a previously approved emissions statement rule for the
1997 ozone NAAQS or the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that covers all portions of
the nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, such rule should be
sufficient for purposes of the emissions statement requirement for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.\48\ The state should review the existing rule to
ensure it is adequate and, if so, may rely on it to meet the emissions
statement requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Where an existing SIP-
approved emissions statement rule is adequate to meet the requirements
of the 2008 Ozone SRR, states can provide the rationale for that
determination to the EPA in a written statement in their SIP submittal
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS to meet this requirement. States should
identify the various requirements and how each is met by the existing
SIP-approved emissions statement program. Where an emissions statement
requirement is modified for any reason, the state must provide the
revision to the emissions statement rule as part of its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 40 CFR 51.1102.
\48\ See 80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan addresses compliance with the
emissions statement requirement in CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the
2008 ozone NAAQS by reference to District Rule 108.2 (``Emission
Statement Requirements'').\49\ District Rule 108.2 requires, among
other things, emissions reporting from all Eastern Kern stationary
sources of NOX and VOC, but provides for waiver of the
requirement by the Air Pollution Control Officer for sources that emit
less than 25 tpy.\50\ The EPA approved District Rule 108.2 as a
revision to the Eastern Kern portion of the California SIP in 2004.\51\
The District determined in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan that the
existing provisions of District Rule 108.2 meet the emissions statement
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 28.
\50\ District Rule 108.2 uses the term ``reactive organic
compounds'' (ROG) instead of VOC. As a practical matter, ROG and VOC
refer to the same set of chemical constituents, and for the sake of
simplicity, we refer to this set of gases as VOC in this proposed
rule.
\51\ 69 FR 29880 (May 26, 2004).
\52\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
For this action, we have reviewed EKAPCD's evaluation of SIP-
approved District Rule 108.2 for compliance with the specific
requirements for emissions statements under CAA section 182(a)(3)(B).
We agree with the District that District Rule 108.2 applies within the
entire Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
applies to all stationary sources of VOC and NOX, except
those emitting less than 25 tpy that the District has waived the
requirement (consistent with CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii)); and
requires reporting, on an annual basis, of total emissions of VOC and
NOX. Also, as required under CAA section 182(a)(3)(B), we
note that
[[Page 68274]]
District Rule 108.2 requires certification that the information
provided to the District is accurate to the best knowledge of the
individual certifying the emissions statement.
Therefore, we propose to approve the emissions statement element of
the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) and the 40 CFR 51.1102.
C. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Requirements for RFP for ozone nonattainment areas are specified in
CAA sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1), and 182(c)(2)(B). Under CAA section
171(1), RFP is defined as meaning such annual incremental reductions in
emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required under CAA part
D (``Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas'') or may reasonably be
required by the EPA for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the
applicable NAAQS by the applicable date. CAA section 172(c)(2)
generally requires that a nonattainment plan include provisions for
RFP. CAA section 182(b)(1) specifically requires that ozone
nonattainment areas that are classified as Moderate or above
demonstrate a 15 percent reduction in VOC between the years of 1990 and
1996. The EPA has typically referred to section 182(b)(1) as the rate
of progress (ROP) requirement. For ozone nonattainment areas classified
as Serious or higher, section 182(c)(2)(B) requires reductions averaged
over each consecutive 3-year period, beginning 6 years after the
baseline year until the attainment date, of at least 3 percent of
baseline emissions per year. The provisions in CAA section
182(c)(2)(B)(ii) allow an amount less than 3 percent of such baseline
emissions each year if the state demonstrates to the EPA that the plan
includes all measures that can feasibly be implemented in the area in
light of technological achievability.
In the 2008 Ozone SRR, the EPA provides that areas classified
Moderate or higher for the 2008 ozone NAAQS will have met the ROP
requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) if the area has a fully approved
15 percent ROP plan for the 1-hour or 1997 ozone NAAQS, provided that
the boundaries of the ozone nonattainment areas are the same.\53\ For
such areas, the EPA interprets the RFP requirements of CAA section
172(c)(2) to require areas classified as Moderate to provide a 15
percent emission reduction of ozone precursors within 6 years of the
baseline year. Areas classified as Serious or higher must meet the RFP
requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(B) by providing an 18 percent
reduction of ozone precursors in the first 6-year period, and an
average ozone precursor emission reduction of 3 percent per year for
all remaining 3-year periods thereafter.\54\ To meet CAA sections
172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) RFP requirements, the state may substitute
NOX emissions reductions for VOC reductions.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 80 FR 12264, at 12271 (March 6, 2015).
\54\ Id.
\55\ 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B);
and 80 FR 12264, at 12271 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except as specifically provided in CAA section 182(b)(1)(C),
emissions reductions from all SIP-approved, federally promulgated, or
otherwise SIP-creditable measures that occur after the baseline year
are creditable for purposes of demonstrating that the RFP targets are
met. Because the EPA has determined that the passage of time has caused
the effect of certain exclusions to be de minimis, the RFP
demonstration is no longer required to calculate and specifically
exclude reductions from measures related to motor vehicle exhaust or
evaporative emissions promulgated by January 1, 1990; regulations
concerning Reid vapor pressure promulgated by November 15, 1990;
measures to correct previous reasonably available control measure
requirements; and, measures required to correct previous inspection and
maintenance programs.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 Ozone SRR requires the RFP baseline year to be the most
recent calendar year for which a complete triennial inventory was
required to be submitted to the EPA. For the purposes of developing RFP
demonstrations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the applicable triennial
inventory year is 2011. As discussed previously, the 2008 Ozone SRR
provided states with the opportunity to use an alternative baseline
year for RFP,\57\ but that provision of the 2008 Ozone SRR was vacated
by the D.C. Circuit in the South Coast II decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ 40 CFR 51.1110(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan addresses both the ROP (VOC only)
demonstration requirement and the RFP demonstration requirement. With
respect to the former, the District cites the EPA's 1997 approval of
the ROP demonstration for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the District's
portion of the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area and concludes
that, based on the 1997 approval, the ROP requirement has been met for
Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 33, and 62 FR 1150, 1172
(January 8, 1997); clarified at 84 FR 45422 (August 29, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the RFP demonstration requirement, the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan includes an RFP demonstration based on emissions
estimates for an RFP baseline year of 2008 and for RFP milestone years
2017 and 2020. CARB developed the emissions estimates for the RFP
demonstration in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan by applying growth
and control profiles to the base year inventory, described in section
III.A of this document. Growth profiles for point and area-wide sources
are derived from surrogates such as economic activity, fuel usage,
population, housing units, etc.\59\ Growth projections were obtained
from government entities with expertise in developing forecasts for
specific sectors, and from econometric models. Control profiles that
account for emission reductions resulting from adopted rules and
regulations are derived from data provided by the regulatory agencies
responsible for the affected emission categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, Table 4: Growth Surrogates
for Point and Area-wide Sources, 18-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the EPA's SIP regulations for nonattainment new source review
(NSR) programs, a state may allow new major stationary sources or major
modifications to use emission reductions credits (ERCs) that were
generated through shutdown or curtailed emissions units occuring before
the base year of an attainment plan. However, to use such ERCs, the
projected emissions inventory used to develop the attainment
demonstration must explicitly include the emissions from such
previously shutdown or curtailed emissions units.\60\ The District has
elected to provide for use of pre-base year ERCs as offsets by
explicitly including such ERCs in the 2020 attainment year
inventory.\61\ The ERC set-aside in the attainment year (2020) is 0.04
tpd of VOC and 0.12 tpd of NOX.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1).
\61\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 27-28.
\62\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, Appendix D (``Banked Emission
Reduction Credits'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the South Coast II decision, which invalidated the
use of alternative RFP baseline years such as 2008, CARB revised the
RFP demonstration for the Eastern Kern area based on a 2011 baseline
year and submitted the revised RFP
[[Page 68275]]
demonstration for Eastern Kern as part of the 2018 SIP Update.\63\ To
develop the 2011 RFP baseline inventory, CARB relied on actual
emissions reported from industrial point sources for year 2011. The
2011 RFP baseline year emissions for areawide, stationary aggregate
sources,\64\ and mobile are backcasted from the 2012 base year, relying
on the same growth and control methodology as is used for future years.
In the 2018 SIP Update, CARB also revised the future baseline emissions
projections for years 2017 and 2020 to reflect updated emissions-
related information for certain off-road source categories. The
emissions projections for 2017 and 2020 in the 2018 SIP Update are
essentially the same as those in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan
except for the projections for certain off-road mobile sources that, as
noted, reflect updated information and that are less than the
corresponding projections in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ 2018 SIP Update, RFP demonstration, chapter IV (``SIP
Elements for Eastern Kern County''), section IV-B (``Reasonable
Further Progress'').
\64\ CARB describes stationary aggregate sources as categories
such as gasoline dispensing facilities that are not inventoried
individually but are estimated as a group and reported as an
aggregated total. See 2018 SIP Update, A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 of this document provides a summary of CARB's 2011 RFP
baseline year, 2017 RFP milestone year, and 2020 RFP milestone/
attainment year emissions estimates from the 2018 SIP Update.
Documentation for the Eastern Kern RFP baseline and milestone emissions
inventories is found in the 2018 SIP Update on pages 21-23 and Appendix
A on pages A-11 through A-14. For both sets of baseline emissions
inventories (those in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan and those in the
2018 SIP Update), emissions estimates reflect District rules adopted
through December 2015 and CARB rules adopted through December 2014.
Table 2--Eastern Kern 2011 Base Year, 2017 and 2020 RFP Milestone Years Emissions Inventories
[Summer planning inventory, tpd]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2017 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary.............................................. 1.0 16.3 1.0 18.6 1.0 19.4
Area Sources............................................ 1.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.2 0.1
On-Road Mobile Sources.................................. 2.6 8.5 1.4 4.2 1.1 3.4
Other (Off-Road) Mobile Sources......................... 4.0 6.0 3.7 5.2 3.6 4.6
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 8.6 31.0 7.2 28.1 6.8 27.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2018 SIP Update, pp. 21-23 and Appendix A, A-11--A-14.
The revised RFP demonstration in the 2018 SIP Update did not
include the ERCs included in year 2020 projections in the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan. However, CARB further revised the RFP demonstration
for Eastern Kern in the 2020 Conformity Budget Update and provided a
demonstration of how the revised budgets are consistent with the RFP
demonstration in the 2018 SIP Update for Eastern Kern, as revised to
include the ERCs. Table 3 of this document presents the updated RFP
demonstration for Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as revised by
CARB in the 2020 Conformity Budget Update.
Table 3--RFP Demonstration for Eastern Kern County for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
[Summer planning inventory, tpd or percent]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC
-----------------------------------------------
2011 2017 2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline VOC.................................................... 8.6 7.2 \a\ 6.9
2020 Transportation Conformity Safety Margin.................... .............. .............. 0.2
2020 Transportation Conformity Rounding Margin.................. .............. .............. 0.05
Baseline VOC + Safety Margin+ Rounding Margin................... .............. 7.2 7.1
Required change since 2011 (VOC or NOX), %...................... .............. 18% 27%
Target VOC level................................................ .............. 7.0 6.3
Apparent shortfall (-)/surplus (+) in VOC....................... .............. -0.1 -0.9
Apparent shortfall (-)/surplus (+) in VOC, %.................... .............. -1.4% -10.0%
VOC shortfall previously provided by NOX substitution, %........ .............. 0.0% 1.4%
Actual VOC shortfall (-)/surplus (+), %......................... .............. -1.4% -8.6%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX
-----------------------------------------------
2011 2017 2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline NOX.................................................... 31.0 28.1 \a\ 27.6
2020 Transportation Conformity Safety Margin.................... .............. .............. 0.2
2020 Transportation Conformity Rounding Margin.................. .............. .............. 0.04
Baseline NOX + Safety Margin + Rounding Margin.................. .............. 28.1 27.9
Change in NOX since 2011........................................ .............. 2.8 3.1
Change in NOX since 2011, %..................................... .............. 9.2% 10.1%
NOX reductions used for VOC substitution through last milestone .............. 0% 1.4%
year, %........................................................
NOX reductions since 2011 available for VOC substitution in this .............. 9.2% 8.7%
milestone year, %..............................................
[[Page 68276]]
NOX reductions since 2011 used for VOC substitution in this .............. 1.4% 8.6%
milestone year, %..............................................
NOX reductions since 2011 surplus after meeting VOC substitution .............. 7.8% 0.1%
needs in this milestone year, %................................
Total shortfall for RFP......................................... .............. 0% 0%
RFP met?........................................................ .............. Yes Yes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2020 Conformity Budget Update, 4.
\a\ Includes ERCs of 0.04 tpd of VOC and 0.12 tpd of NOX. See Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, Appendix D.
The revised RFP demonstration calculates future year VOC targets
from the 2011 baseline, consistent with CAA 182(c)(2)(B)(i), which
requires reductions of ``at least 3 percent of baseline emissions each
year;'' and it substitutes NOX reductions for VOC reductions
beginning in milestone year 2017 to meet VOC emission targets.\65\ For
Eastern Kern, CARB concludes that the revised RFP demonstration meets
the applicable requirements for both milestone years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ NOX substitution is permitted under EPA
regulations. See 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B); and 80 FR 12264, at 12271 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
In 1997 the EPA approved a 15 percent ROP plan for the Kern
District portion of the San Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and the Eastern Kern nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS is the same as the Kern District portion of the San
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS except
that the Eastern Kern nonattainment area (for the 2008 ozone NAAQS)
excludes the Indian Wells Valley.\66\ Despite the difference in
boundaries between the Kern District area approved for the 15 percent
ROP and boundaries for the Eastern Kern nonattainment area, the 2008
Ozone SRR allows the District to use the prior approval as
justification that the 15 percent ROP has been met for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS because the Eastern Kern nonattainment area represents a portion
of the area for which EPA has fully approved a 15 percent ROP plan, and
none of the Eastern Kern nonattainment area lies outside the area for
which the 15 percent ROP plan was approved.\67\ As a result, we agree
with the District that the District and CARB have met the ROP
requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) for Eastern Kern with respect to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ 62 FR 1150, at 1183 (January 8, 1997).
\67\ See 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to future year baseline projections, we have reviewed
the growth and control factors and find them acceptable and conclude
that the future baseline emissions projections in the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan reflect appropriate calculation methods and the latest
planning assumptions.
With respect to the RFP demonstration requirement, we note that the
future baseline projections for 2017 and 2020 take into account
emissions reductions from adopted state and local air pollution control
rules and regulations. Generally, to take credit for emissions
reductions from state and local control measures (such as adopted state
and local rules and regulations) in future baseline projections, the
control measures must be approved by the EPA as part of the SIP. For
this action, we have reviewed the District's VOC and NOX
rules that the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP relied upon in developing
future year baseline emissions projections and concluded that emissions
reductions from stationary sources assumed by the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan for future years are supported by rules approved as part of
the SIP.\68\ With respect to mobile sources, the EPA has taken action
in recent years to approve CARB mobile source regulations into the
California SIP.\69\ Therefore, we find that the future year baseline
projections in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan are properly supported
by SIP-approved stationary and mobile source control measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ EPA, Memorandum to Docket ID EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0709, dated
August 26, 2020.
\69\ See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82 FR 14446 (March 21,
2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May 18, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the emissions inventory documentation in the
2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP, as discussed above and in section III.A of
this document, we find that CARB and the District have used the most
recent planning and activity assumptions, emissions models, and
methodologies in developing the RFP baseline and milestone year
emissions inventories. For these reasons, we have determined that the
2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP demonstrates RFP in the 2017 and 2020
milestone years, consistent with applicable CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. Therefore, we propose to approve the RFP demonstration for
Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS under sections 172(c)(2) and
182(c)(2)(B) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(ii).
D. Contingency Measures
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Under the CAA, 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas classified under
subpart 2 as Moderate or above must include in their SIPs contingency
measures consistent with sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). Contingency
measures are additional controls or measures to be implemented in the
event the area fails to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the
attainment date. The SIP should contain trigger mechanisms for the
contingency measures, specify a schedule for implementation, and
indicate that the measure will be implemented without significant
further action by the state or the EPA.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). See also 2008 Ozone SRR,
80 FR 12264, at 12285 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the CAA nor the EPA's implementing regulations establish a
specific level of emissions reductions that implementation of
contingency measures must achieve, but the EPA's 2008 Ozone SRR
reiterates the EPA's policy that contingency measures should provide
for emissions reductions approximately equivalent to one year's worth
of progress, amounting to reductions of 3 percent of the RFP baseline
emissions inventory for the nonattainment area.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ 80 FR 12264, at 12285 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 68277]]
It has been the EPA's longstanding interpretation of section
172(c)(9) that states may rely on federal measures (e.g., federal
mobile source measures based on the incremental turnover of the motor
vehicle fleet each year) and local measures already scheduled for
implementation that provide emissions reductions in excess of those
needed to provide for RFP or expeditious attainment. The key is that
the statute requires that contingency measures provide for additional
emissions reductions that are not relied on for RFP or attainment and
that are not included in the RFP or attainment demonstrations. The
purpose of contingency measures is to provide continued emissions
reductions while the plan is being revised to meet the missed milestone
or attainment date.
The EPA has approved numerous SIPs under this interpretation--i.e.,
SIPs that use as contingency measures one or more federal or local
measures that are in place and provide reductions that are in excess of
the reductions required by the attainment demonstration or RFP
plan,\72\ and there is case law supporting the EPA's interpretation in
this regard.\73\ However, in Bahr v. EPA, the Ninth Circuit rejected
the EPA's interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9) as allowing for early
implementation of contingency measures.\74\ The Ninth Circuit concluded
that contingency measures must take effect at the time the area fails
to make RFP or attain by the applicable attainment date, not
before.\75\ Thus, within the geographic jurisdiction of the Ninth
Circuit, states cannot rely on early-implemented measures to comply
with the contingency measure requirements under CAA section 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9).\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See, e.g., 62 FR 15844 (April 3, 1997) (direct final rule
approving an Indiana ozone SIP revision); 62 FR 66279 (December 18,
1997) (final rule approving an Illinois ozone SIP revision); 66 FR
30811 (June 8, 2001) (direct final rule approving a Rhode Island
ozone SIP revision); 66 FR 586 (January 3, 2001) (final rule
approving District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia ozone SIP
revisions); and 66 FR 634 (January 3, 2001) (final rule approving a
Connecticut ozone SIP revision).
\73\ See, e.g., LEAN v. EPA, 382 F.3d 575 (5th Cir. 2004)
(upholding contingency measures that were previously required and
implemented where they were in excess of the attainment
demonstration and RFP SIP).
\74\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218, at 1235-1237 (9th Cir. 2016).
\75\ Id. at 1235-1237.
\76\ The Bahr v. EPA decision involved a challenge to an EPA
approval of contingency measures under the general nonattainment
area plan provisions for contingency measures in CAA section
172(c)(9), but, given the similarity between the statutory language
in section 172(c)(9) and the ozone-specific contingency measure
provision in section 182(c)(9), we find that the decision affects
how both sections of the Act must be interpreted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The District and CARB had largely prepared the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan prior to the Bahr v. EPA decision, and thus, consistent with
contingency measure elements of previous ozone plans, it relies solely
upon surplus emissions reductions from already-implemented control
measures to demonstrate compliance with the contingency measure
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, chapter XIV. (``Contingency
Measures''), 38-39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2018 SIP Update, CARB revises the RFP demonstration for the
2008 ozone NAAQS for Eastern Kern and recalculates the extent of
surplus emission reductions (i.e., surplus to meeting the RFP milestone
requirement for a given milestone year) in the milestone years and
estimates the incremental emissions reductions in the year following
the attainment year. In light of the Bahr v. EPA decision, however, the
2018 SIP Update does not rely on the surplus or incremental emissions
reductions to comply with the contingency measures requirements of
sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) but, rather, to provide context in
which to evaluate the adequacy of Bahr-compliant (i.e., to take effect
if triggered) contingency measures for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ 2018 SIP Update, chapter IV (``SIP Elements for Eastern
Kern County''), 23-25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To comply with CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9), as interpreted
in the Bahr v. EPA decision, the state must develop, adopt, and submit
a contingency measure to be triggered upon a failure to meet an RFP
milestone or attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date
regardless of the extent to which already-implemented measures would
achieve surplus or incremental emissions reductions beyond those
necessary for RFP or attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, to fully
address the contingency measure requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in
Eastern Kern, the District has committed to supplement the contingency
measure element of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP by developing,
adopting and submitting a contingency measure to CARB in sufficient
time to allow CARB to submit the contingency measure as a SIP revision
to the EPA within 12 months of the EPA's final action on the
contingency measure element of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ Letter dated September 1, 2020, from Glen E. Stephens, Air
Pollution Control Officer, EKAPCD, to Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District's commitment is to amend Rule 410 (``Organic
Solvents''), and if necessary, Rule 410.8 (``Aerospace Assembly and
Coating Operations'') or Rule 432 (``Polyester Resin Operations''),
through the required public review and subsequent EKAPCD Board approval
processes, to apply more stringent requirements upon a determination
that the Eastern Kern nonattainment area failed to meet an RFP
milestone or failed to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. The District anticipates the following types of rule
revisions and associated emissions reductions:
Amend Rule 410 to tighten the control efficiency from 85
percent to 95 percent or to establish a maximum VOC content requirement
on all organic solvents over a minimum threshold. The District
estimates that these revisions would achieve approximately 0.183 tpd
reduction in VOC emissions.
Amend District Rule 410.8 to require use of more stringent
formulations and additional VOC controls. The District estimates that
these revisions would achieve approximately 0.014 tpd reduction in VOC
emissions.
Amend Rule 432 to lower the specific material monomer
weight percentage and require addition controls at specific emission
levels. The District estimates that these revisions would achieve
approximately 0.003 tpd reduction in VOC emissions.
CARB attached the District's commitment to revise a rule or rules
to include contingency provisions to a letter committing CARB to adopt
and submit the revised EKAPCD rule(s) to the EPA within one year of the
EPA's final conditional approval of the contingency measure element of
the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.\80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ Letter dated September 18, 2020, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to John Busterud, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) require contingency measures
to address potential failure to achieve RFP milestones or failure to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date through
implementation of additional emissions controls in the event the area
fails to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date. Contingency measures must provide for the implementation of
additional emissions controls, if triggered, without significant
further action by the state or the EPA.
[[Page 68278]]
As discussed above, the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP provides
estimates of emissions reductions that can be considered surplus in
that they are beyond the reductions necessary for RFP or attainment,
but it does not yet include the type of measure that would implement
additional emissions controls, if triggered, without significant
further action by the state or the EPA. However, CARB and the District
recognize that the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP needs to be supplemented
with such a measure or measures and have submitted commitments to adopt
and submit revised District rule(s) with the necessary provisions as a
SIP revision within one year of the EPA's final action the contingency
measure element of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP. The specific types
of revisions the District has committed to make, such as tightening
control efficiencies or establishing content limits, upon a failure to
achieve a milestone or a failure to attain, would comply with the
requirements in CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) because the
additional controls would be undertaken if the area fails to achieve a
milestone or fails to attain, and would take effect without significant
further action by the State or the EPA.
Next, we considered the adequacy of the contingency measure(s)
(once adopted and submitted) from the standpoint of the magnitude of
emissions reductions the measure would provide (if triggered). Neither
the CAA nor the EPA's implementing regulations for the ozone NAAQS
establish a specific amount of emissions reductions that implementation
of contingency measures must achieve, but we generally expect that
contingency measures should provide for emissions reductions
approximately equivalent to one year's worth of RFP, which, for ozone,
amounts to reductions of 3 percent of the RFP baseline year emissions
inventory for the nonattainment area. For the 2008 ozone NAAQS in
Eastern Kern, one year's worth of RFP is approximately 0.26 tpd of VOC
or 0.93 tpd of NOX reductions.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ One year's worth of RFP for Eastern Kern corresponds to 3
percent of the 2011 RFP baseline year inventories for VOC (8.6 tpd)
and NOX (31.0 tpd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the purposes of evaluating the adequacy of the emissions
reductions from the contingency measures (once adopted and submitted),
we find it useful to distinguish between contingency measures to
address potential failure to achieve RFP milestones (``RFP contingency
measures'') and contingency measures to address potential failure to
attain the NAAQS (``attainment contingency measures'').
With respect to the RFP contingency measure requirement for
milestone year 2017, we note that, to address nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, CARB has recently submitted base
year (2017) emissions inventories for the various California
nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, including Eastern
Kern.\82\ We have reviewed the base year (2017) emissions inventory for
Eastern Kern and find, based on that inventory, that Eastern Kern has
achieved the emissions reductions necessary to meet the RFP requirement
for 2017 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\83\ Because the inventory of actual
emissions in 2017 shows that the RFP milestones for 2017 have been met,
the contingency measure for failure to meet the 2017 RFP milestones
will never be triggered, and therefore, the contingency measure
requirement for the 2017 RFP milestone year is now moot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ CARB, Staff Report, 70 ppb Ozone SIP Submittal, submitted
by CARB electronically on July 27, 2020 as an attachment to a letter
dated July 24, 2020.
\83\ The base year (2017) emissions inventory for Eastern Kern
is 7.18 tpd for VOC and 27.01 tpd for NOX. The
corresponding RFP baseline values from the RFP demonstration for
which we are proposing approval herein are 7.2 tpd for VOC and 28.1
tpd for NOX. See page 23 of the 2018 SIP Update and page
4 of the 2020 Conformity Budget Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Eastern Kern 2008 ozone Serious nonattainment area, the
2020 RFP milestone coincides with the attainment date, and thus, we
review the emissions reductions estimated by the District for the to-
be-adopted contingency measure(s) in light of the facts and
circumstances in Eastern Kern in the year following the attainment year
to determine whether there will be sufficient continued progress in
that area in the event the area fails to achieve the 2020 RFP milestone
or fails to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 2020 while a new attainment
plan is being developed.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ CAA section 182(g)(2) provides that states must submit RFP
milestone compliance demonstrations within 90 days after the date on
which an applicable milestone occurs, except where the milestone and
attainment date are the same and the standard has been attained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, given the types of rule revisions under
consideration, the District estimates VOC emissions reductions ranging
from 0.183 tpd (if only revisions to Rule 410 are adopted) to 0.190 tpd
(if revisions are adopted for all three rules under consideration).
This amounts to a range of approximately 71 percent to 74 percent of
one year's worth of RFP for this area. The EPA normally recommends that
contingency measures provide for the equivalent of one year's worth of
progress, and based on the estimates provided by the District, the
contingency measure(s) (to be adopted by the District) would fall short
of that recommendation.
However, the District's contingency measure(s) would provide
additional emissions reductions beyond those that are already expected
to occur in the year following the attainment year. Based on emissions
inventories in the 2018 SIP Update, emissions in the year following the
attainment year (2021) in Eastern Kern are expected to be approximately
0.05 tpd lower for VOC and 0.22 tpd lower for NOX than in
the attainment year (2020).\85\ The downward trend in emissions
reflects the continuing benefits of already-implemented measures and is
primarily the result of 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. While the continuing reductions from such already-implemented
measures do not constitute contingency measures themselves, they
provide context in which we evaluate the adequacy of the contingency
measure submitted (or, in this case, to be submitted) to fulfill the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ Estimates for the emissions reductions in the year
following the attainment year are based on the emissions inventories
for Eastern Kern in the 2018 SIP Update for years 2021 and 2020--see
pages A-11--A-14 of the 2018 SIP Update. The estimate of the
reductions in emissions of 0.05 tpd of VOC and 0.22 tpd of
NOX in 2021 (relative to 2020) amounts to approximately
19 percent and 24 percent of one year's worth of progress,
respectively in this area based on the 2011 RFP baseline inventory
from the 2018 SIP Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this instance, we find that the emissions reductions from the
to-be-adopted contingency measures together with the reductions
expected to occur due to already-implemented measures would amount to
approximately 114 percent to 117 percent of one year's worth of
progress, which is consistent with our guidance recommending that
contingency measures provide for one year's worth of progress in the
event of a failure to meet an RFP milestone or a failure to attain the
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. Therefore, in light of the
year-to-year reductions in the VOC and NOX inventories, we
find that the to-be submitted contingency measure(s) would provide
sufficient emissions reductions even though reductions from the
measures would be lower than the EPA normally recommends for such
measures.
[[Page 68279]]
For these reasons, and in light of commitments from the District
and CARB to adopt and submit a revised District rule(s) that will apply
tighter limits or requirements upon a failure to achieve an RFP
milestone or the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, we
propose to approve conditionally the contingency measure element of the
2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP as meeting the contingency measure
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). 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 or rules with contingent provisions). Conditional
approvals are authorized under CAA section 110(k)(4).
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
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 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 (``budgets'') contained in
all control strategy SIPs. Budgets are generally established for
specific years and specific pollutants or precursors. Ozone plans
should identify budgets for on-road emissions of ozone precursors
(NOX and VOC) in the area for each RFP milestone year and,
if the plan demonstrates attainment, the attainment year.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more
information on the transportation conformity requirements and
applicable policies on budgets, please visit our transportation
conformity website at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a budget consists of
three basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP
submission; (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.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan includes budgets for the 2017 RFP
milestone year and the 2020 attainment year. The budgets in the Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan are 2 tpd for VOC and 5 tpd for NOX for
2017 and 2 tpd for VOC and 4 tpd for NOX for 2020. The
budgets reflect estimates of on-road motor vehicle emissions for a
given year that are rounded up to the nearest whole tpd. The ``rounding
up'' convention results in ``rounding margins'' \89\ of 0.65 tpd for
VOC and 0.77 tpd for NOX for the 2017 budgets and 0.95 tpd
for VOC and 0.64 tpd for NOX for the 2020 budgets. The
budgets for 2017 and 2020 were derived from the 2008 RFP baseline year
and the associated RFP milestone years. As such, the budgets are
affected by the South Coast II decision vacating the alternative
baseline year provision, and therefore, the EPA has not previously
acted on the budgets. In the submittal letter for the 2017 Eastern Kern
Ozone SIP, CARB requested that the EPA limit the duration of our
approval of the budgets in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan to last
only until the effective date of future EPA adequacy findings for
replacement budgets.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ In this context, ``rounding margins'' refer to the
difference between the budget and the estimate of on-road motor
vehicle emissions for a given year made using EMFAC2014.
\90\ Letter dated October 25, 2017, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, transmitting the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 5, 2018, CARB submitted the 2018 SIP Update, which
revised the RFP demonstration for Eastern Kern consistent with the
South Coast II decision (i.e., by using a 2011 RFP baseline year). The
2018 SIP Update did not identify new budgets for Eastern Kern for VOC
and NOX; however, when the 2020 budgets, including their
rounding margins, and ERCs in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan were
factored into the revised 2020 RFP demonstration for Eastern Kern in
the 2018 SIP Update, Eastern Kern could no longer demonstrate RFP for
2020.
On August 31, 2020,\91\ CARB submitted the 2020 Conformity Budget
Update that includes revised 2020 budgets. CARB also provided a
technical correction to the 2020 RFP demonstration to incorporate the
ERCs assumed in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan and provided a
demonstration that the 2020 revised budgets (that include much lower
rounding margins) are consistent with the RFP demonstration in the 2018
SIP Update, as corrected to include the ERCs.\92\ CARB did not request
that the EPA limit the duration of our approval of the revised 2020
budgets in the 2020 Conformity Budget Update.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ Submitted electronically on August 31, 2020 as an
attachment to a letter dated August 25, 2020, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to John Busterud, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region IX, transmitting the revised 2020 budgets.
\92\ Id.
\93\ Email dated July 28, 2020, from Nesamani Kalandiyur, CARB,
to John Ungvarsky, EPA, Region IX, clarifying that CARB would not
request the EPA to limit the approval of the budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are proposing action only on the 2020 RFP milestone budgets
adopted by CARB in the 2020 Conformity Budget Update for the 2017
Eastern Kern Ozone SIP. CARB did not revise the 2017 RFP milestone year
budgets in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan because they would only
have been used to evaluate regional transportation-related emissions
analyses for years 2017 through 2019, and with the passage of time,
such analyses are no longer necessary for conformity purposes.
Therefore, the EPA is not acting on the 2017 budgets in the Eastern
Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.
The revised 2020 budgets in the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP were
derived from motor vehicle emissions estimates prepared using
EMFAC2014,\94\ and the
[[Page 68280]]
travel activity data provided by Kern COG. The 2020 budgets for
NOX and VOC in the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP are provided
in Table 4 of this document. To develop the budgets, the District
rounded up the motor vehicle emissions estimates for 2020 to the
nearest tenth of a ton and included a safety margin. The budgets for
Eastern Kern in 2020 are 1.3 tpd for VOC and 3.6 tpd for
NOX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ As previously noted, EMFAC2014 is CARB's model for
estimating emissions from on-road vehicles operating in California.
See 80 FR 77337 (December 14, 2015). We have announced the
availability of an updated version of EMFAC, referred to as
EMFAC2017. See 84 FR 41717 (August 15, 2019). For the 2017 Eastern
Kern Ozone SIP, EMFAC2014 was the appropriate model to use for SIP
development purposes at the time it was prepared.
Table 4--Transportation Conformity Budgets for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS in
Eastern Kern
[summer planning inventory, tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020
-------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline Emissions...................... 1.05 3.36
Safety Margin........................... 0.2 0.2
-------------------------------
Total............................... 1.25 3.56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transportation Conformity Budget........ 1.3 3.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2020 Conformity Budget Update, table 3. The budgets reflect a
rounding-up convention to the nearest tenth of a tpd.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
As part of our review of the approvability of the budgets in the
2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP, we have evaluated the budgets using our
adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). We will complete the
adequacy review concurrent with our final action on the 2017 Eastern
Kern Ozone SIP. The EPA is not required under its transportation
conformity rule to find budgets adequate prior to proposing approval of
them.\95\ In this action, the EPA is announcing that the adequacy
process for these budgets begins, and the public has 30 days to comment
on their adequacy, per the transportation conformity regulation at 40
CFR 93.118(f)(2)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ Under the transportation conformity regulations, the EPA
may review the adequacy of submitted motor vehicle emission budgets
simultaneously with the EPA's approval or disapproval of the
submitted implementation plan. 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As documented in a separate memorandum included in the docket for
this rulemaking, we preliminarily conclude that the budgets in the 2017
Eastern Kern Ozone SIP meet each adequacy criterion.\96\ While adequacy
and approval are two separate actions, reviewing the budgets in terms
of the adequacy criteria informs the EPA's decision to propose to
approve the budgets. We have completed our detailed review of the 2017
Eastern Kern Ozone SIP and are proposing herein to approve the RFP
demonstration. We have also reviewed the budgets in the 2017 Eastern
Kern Ozone SIP and found that they are consistent with the RFP
demonstration for which we are proposing approval, are based on control
measures that have already been adopted and implemented, and meet all
other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements including the
adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.1118(e)(4) and (5). Therefore, we are
proposing to approve the 2020 budgets in the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone
SIP. At the point when we either finalize the adequacy process or
approve the budgets for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the 2017 Eastern Kern
Ozone SIP as proposed (whichever occurs first; note that they could
also occur concurrently per 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii)), they will
replace the budgets that we previously found adequate for use in
transportation conformity determinations.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ Memorandum dated September 11, 2020, from Karina O'Connor,
Air Planning Office, EPA Region 9, to the docket for this proposed
rulemaking, titled ``Adequacy Documentation for Plan Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets in 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP.''
\97\ In November 2008, we found adequate the 2008 budgets from
the ``Eastern Kern County 2008 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan,''
February 28, 2008. See 73 FR 71643 (November 25, 2008). The 2008
budgets are 5 tpd for VOC and 18 tpd for NOX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Other Clean Air Act Requirements Applicable to Serious Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
In addition to the SIP requirements discussed in the previous
sections, the CAA includes certain other SIP requirements applicable to
Serious ozone nonattainment areas, such as Eastern Kern. We describe
these provisions and their current status below.
1. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs
Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2 as Serious or above to
implement an enhanced motor vehicle inspection/maintenance (I/M)
program in each urbanized area (in the nonattainment area), as defined
by the Bureau of the Census, with a 1980 population of 200,000 or more.
The requirements for those programs are provided in CAA section
182(c)(3) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
An enhanced vehicle I/M program is not required in Eastern Kern
because the area does not meet the population threshold in CAA section
182(c)(3).\98\ The area is also not subject to the basic vehicle I/M
program requirement, once again, because it does not meet the
population threshold for implementation of such a program.\99\ The
State of California has, however, decided to implement a basic I/M
vehicle program in Eastern Kern as part of the ozone control strategy
for the area. We most recently approved California's I/M program in
2010.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ 40 CFR 51.390(a)(9).
\99\ 40 CFR 51.390(a)(4).
\100\ 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010). See, also, the related
proposed rule at 74 FR 41818, at 41823 (August 19, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. New Source Review Rules
Section 182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires states to develop SIP
revisions containing permit programs for each of its ozone
nonattainment areas. The SIP revisions are to include requirements for
permits in accordance with CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173 for the
construction and operation of each new or modified major stationary
source for VOC and NOX anywhere in the nonattainment area.
The 2008 Ozone SRR includes provisions and guidance for nonattainment
NSR programs.\101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP cites District Rule 210.1 (``New
and Modified Stationary Source Review (NSR)''), as amended by the
District on May 4, 2000, as the rule that meets Serious area
requirements for nonattainment NSR.\102\ CARB has submitted District
Rule 210.1 to the EPA, but we have not taken action yet on it. More
recently, CARB has
[[Page 68281]]
submitted a new District rule, Rule 210.1A (``Major New and Modified
Stationary Source Review (MNSR)''), that includes new and revised terms
and definitions to meet certain additional NSR requirements. We will be
taking action as necessary on District Rules 210.1 and 210.1A in a
separate rulemaking and will evaluate compliance with Serious area NSR
nonattainment requirements at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan, 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Clean Fuels Fleet Program
Sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246 of the CAA require California to
submit to the EPA for approval measures to implement a Clean Fuels
Fleet Program. Section 182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows states to opt-out
of the federal clean-fuel vehicle fleet program by submitting a SIP
revision consisting of a program or programs that will result in at
least equivalent long-term reductions in ozone precursors and toxic air
emissions.
In 1994, CARB submitted a SIP revision to the EPA to opt-out of the
federal clean-fuel fleet program. The submittal included a
demonstration that California's low-emissions vehicle program achieved
emissions reductions at least as large as would be achieved by the
federal program. The EPA approved the SIP revision to opt-out of the
federal program on August 27, 1999.\103\ There have been no changes to
the federal Clean Fuels Fleet program since the EPA approved the
California SIP revision to opt-out of the federal program, and no
corresponding changes to the SIP are required. Thus, we find that the
California SIP revision to opt-out of the federal program, as approved
in 1999, meets the requirements of CAA sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246
for Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ 64 FR 46849 (August 27, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gasoline Vapor Recovery
Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA requires states to submit a SIP
revision by November 15, 1992, that requires owners or operators of
gasoline dispensing systems to install and operate gasoline vehicle
refueling vapor recovery (``Stage II'') systems in ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Moderate and above. California's ozone
nonattainment areas implemented Stage II vapor recovery well before the
passage of the CAA Amendments of 1990.\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 at 13514 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA requires the EPA to promulgate
standards requiring motor vehicles to be equipped with onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) systems. The EPA promulgated the first
set of ORVR system regulations in 1994 for phased implementation on
vehicle manufacturers, and since the end of 2006, essentially all new
gasoline-powered light- and medium-duty vehicles are ORVR-
equipped.\105\ Section 202(a)(6) also authorizes the EPA to waive the
SIP requirement under CAA section 182(b)(3) for installation of Stage
II vapor recovery systems after such time as the EPA determines that
ORVR systems are in widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet.
Effective May 16, 2012, the EPA waived the requirement of CAA section
182(b)(3) for Stage II vapor recovery systems in ozone nonattainment
areas regardless of classification.\106\ Thus, a SIP submittal meeting
CAA section 182(b)(3) is not required for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ 77 FR 28772, at 28774 (May 16, 2012).
\106\ See 40 CFR 51.126(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While a SIP submittal meeting CAA section 182(b)(3) is not required
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, under California state law (i.e., Health and
Safety Code section 41954), CARB is required to adopt procedures and
performance standards for controlling gasoline emissions from gasoline
marketing operations, including transfer and storage operations. State
law also authorizes CARB, in cooperation with local air districts, to
certify vapor recovery systems, to identify defective equipment and to
develop test methods. CARB has adopted numerous revisions to its vapor
recovery program regulations and continues to rely on its vapor
recovery program to achieve emissions reductions in ozone nonattainment
areas in California.
In Eastern Kern, the installation and operation of CARB-certified
vapor recovery equipment is required and enforced through District Rule
412.1 (``Transfer of Gasoline into Vehicle Fuel Tanks''), most recently
approved into the SIP on October 7, 1996.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ 61 FR 52297 (October 7, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Enhanced Ambient Air Monitoring
Section 182(c)(1) of the CAA requires that all ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Serious or above implement measures to enhance and
improve monitoring for ambient concentrations of ozone, NOX,
and VOC, and to improve monitoring of emissions of NOX and
VOC. The enhanced monitoring network for ozone is referred to as the
photochemical assessment monitoring station (PAMS) network. The EPA
promulgated final PAMS regulations on February 12, 1993.\108\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ 58 FR 8452 (February 12, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 10, 1993, CARB submitted to the EPA a SIP revision
addressing the PAMS network for six ozone nonattainment areas in
California, including San Joaquin Valley (which then included Eastern
Kern), to meet the enhanced monitoring requirements of CAA section
182(c)(1) and the PAMS regulations. The EPA determined that the PAMS
SIP revision met all applicable requirements for enhanced monitoring
and approved the PAMS submittal into the California SIP.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ 82 FR 45191 (September 28, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to 2006, the EPA's ambient air monitoring regulations in 40
CFR part 58 (``Ambient Air Quality Surveillance'') set forth specific
SIP requirements (see former 40 CFR 52.20). In 2006, the EPA
significantly revised and reorganized 40 CFR part 58.\110\ Under
revised 40 CFR part 58, SIP revisions are no longer required; rather,
compliance with EPA monitoring regulations is established through
review of required annual monitoring network plans.\111\ The 2008 Ozone
SRR made no changes to these requirements.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006).
\111\ 40 CFR 58.2(b) now provides that, ``The requirements
pertaining to provisions for an air quality surveillance system in
the SIP are contained in this part.''
\112\ The 2008 ozone SRR addresses PAMS-related requirements at
80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP does not specifically address the
enhanced ambient air monitoring requirement in CAA section 182(c)(1).
However, we note that CARB includes the ambient monitoring network
within Eastern Kern in its annual monitoring network plan that is
submitted to the EPA, and that we have approved the most recent annual
monitoring network plan (``Annual Network Plan Covering Monitoring
Operations in 25 California Air Districts, July 2019'' (``2019 ANP''))
with respect to the Eastern Kern element.\113\ In addition, CARB has
fulfilled the requirement under 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, section
5(h), to submit an enhanced monitoring plan for Eastern Kern.\114\
Based on our review and approval of the 2019 ANP with respect to
Eastern Kern and our earlier approval of the PAMS SIP revision, we
[[Page 68282]]
propose to find that the enhanced monitoring requirements under CAA
section 182(c)(1) for Eastern Kern have been met with respect to the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ Letter dated November 26, 2019, from Gwen Yoshimura,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Ravi
Ramalingam, Chief, Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment
Branch, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB.
\114\ Letter dated November 25, 2019, from Dr. Michael T.
Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to
Mr. Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, enclosing
the ``2019 Enhanced Monitoring Plan (November 2019)''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proposed Action
For the reasons discussed herein, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the
EPA is proposing to approve as a revision to the California SIP the
following portions of the 2017 Eastern Kern Ozone SIP submitted by CARB
on October 25, 2017, December 5, 2018, and August 31, 2020:
Base year emissions inventory element in the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(3)
and 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1115 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
Emissions statement element in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) and 40 CFR
51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
ROP demonstration element in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA 182(b)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
RFP demonstration element in Chapter IV of the 2018 SIP
Update, as corrected in the 2020 Conformity Budget Update, as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B), and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
Motor vehicle emissions budgets in the 2020 Conformity
Budget Update for the RFP milestone/attainment year of 2020 (as shown
in Table 4 of this document) because they are consistent with the RFP
demonstration for 2020 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS proposed for approval
herein and meet the other criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e); and
We are also proposing to find that the:
California SIP revision to opt-out of the federal Clean
Fuels Fleet Program meets the requirements of CAA sections 182(c)(4)(A)
and 246 and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS with respect to
Eastern Kern; and
Requirements for enhanced monitoring under CAA section
182(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1102 for Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
have been met.
In addition, we are proposing, under CAA section 110(k)(4), to
approve conditionally the contingency measure element of the 2017
Eastern Kern Ozone SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA sections
172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) for RFP and attainment contingency measures.
Our proposed approval is based on commitments by the District and CARB
to supplement the element through submission, as a SIP revision (within
one year of our final conditional approval action), of a revised
District rule or rules that would add new limits or other requirements
if an RFP milestone is not met or if Eastern Kern fails to attain the
2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ Letter dated September 1, 2020, from Glen E. Stephens, Air
Pollution Control Officer, EKAPCD, to Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB; and letter dated September 18, 2020, from Richard W.
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to John Busterud, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
for the next 30 days and will consider comments before taking final
action.
V. 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 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 in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 6, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-22601 Filed 10-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P