[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 217 (Monday, November 9, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71264-71270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23033]
[[Page 71264]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145; FRL-10015-43-Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of
Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast
Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve or conditionally approve portions of a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by California to address
Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements for the 2006 and 2012 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air
Basin (``South Coast'') PM2.5 nonattainment area.
Specifically, the EPA is approving all but the contingency measure
element of the submitted SIP revision as meeting all applicable
Moderate area requirements for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
and conditionally approving the contingency measure element as meeting
both the Moderate area contingency measure requirement for the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the Serious area contingency measure
requirement for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition,
the EPA is approving 2019 and 2022 motor vehicle emissions budgets for
use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is also reclassifying the South Coast
PM2.5 nonattainment area, including reservation areas of
Indian country and any other area of Indian country within it where the
EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction, as a
Serious nonattainment area for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
based on the EPA's determination that the area cannot practicably
attain the standard by the applicable Moderate area attainment date of
December 31, 2021. As a consequence of this reclassification,
California is required to submit a Serious area attainment plan that
includes a demonstration of attainment of the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area as expeditiously as
practicable and no later than December 31, 2025.
DATES: This rule will be effective on December 9, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information. 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: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3877, or by email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
A. Moderate Area Planning Requirements
B. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Date
C. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country
D. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated levels of PM2.5 (particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less) and premature mortality.
Other important health effects associated with PM2.5
exposure include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease,
changes in lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms.
Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children.\1\
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a solid
or liquid particle (``primary PM2.5'' or ``direct
PM2.5'') or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions among precursor pollutants such as nitrogen
oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia
(``secondary PM2.5'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 78 FR 3086, 3088 (January 15, 2013).
\2\ EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, No. EPA/
600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF, October 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA first established annual and 24-hour NAAQS for
PM2.5 on July 18, 1997.\3\ The annual standard was set at
15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) based on a 3-year
average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and the 24-hour
(daily) standard was set at 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on the 3-year
average of the annual 98th percentile values of 24-hour
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitor within an area.\4\ On
October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of
the annual 98th percentile values of 24-hour concentrations.\5\ On
January 15, 2013, the EPA revised the annual standard to 12.0 [micro]g/
m\3\ based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations.\6\ We refer to this standard as the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 62 FR 38652 (codified at 40 CFR 50.7).
\4\ The primary and secondary standards were set at the same
level for both the 24-hour and the annual PM2.5
standards.
\5\ 71 FR 61144.
\6\ 78 FR 3086.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, the EPA
designated the South Coast area as nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.\7\ The EPA classified the area as Moderate
nonattainment on June 2, 2014 and reclassified it as Serious
nonattainment for these NAAQS on January 13, 2016.\8\ On January 15,
2015, the EPA designated and classified the South Coast area as
Moderate nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\9\ The
South Coast area is also designated and classified as Moderate
[[Page 71265]]
nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 74 FR 58688 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
\8\ 79 FR 31566 and 81 FR 1514. The EPA promulgated these
PM2.5 nonattainment area classifications in response to a
2013 decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanding
the EPA's prior implementation rule for the PM2.5 NAAQS
and directing the EPA to promulgate implementation rules pursuant to
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act. Natural Resources Defense
Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
\9\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
\10\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005) (codified at 40 CFR 81.305). In
November 2007, California submitted the 2007 PM2.5 Plan
to provide for attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in
the South Coast. On November 9, 2011, the EPA approved all but the
contingency measures in the 2007 PM2.5 Plan (76 FR
69928), and on October 29, 2013, the EPA approved a revised
contingency measure SIP for the area (78 FR 64402). On July 25,
2016, the EPA determined that the South Coast area had attained the
1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 2011-2013
monitoring data, suspending any remaining attainment-related
planning requirements for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in this area (81 FR 48350).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The local air district with primary responsibility for developing a
plan to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area is
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or
``District''). The District works cooperatively with the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) in preparing these plans. Authority for
regulating sources in the South Coast is split between the District,
which has responsibility for regulating stationary and most area
sources, and CARB, which has responsibility for regulating most mobile
sources and some categories of consumer products.
On July 2, 2020, we proposed to approve or conditionally approve
portions of a SIP revision submitted by California to address CAA
requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast
nonattainment area.\11\ The submitted SIP revision, the ``Final 2016
Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017),'' was adopted by the SCAQMD
Governing Board on March 3, 2017 and submitted by CARB to the EPA on
April 27, 2017.\12\ We refer to those portions of this SIP submission
that address the Serious area requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate area requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS as the ``2016 PM2.5 Plan'' or
``Plan.'' The EPA previously approved those portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan that pertain to the requirements for implementing
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, except for the contingency measure
component of the Plan.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 85 FR 40026.
\12\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, with enclosures.
\13\ 84 FR 3305 (February 12, 2019). As part of this action, the
EPA found that, for purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area
fails to make RFP under CAA sections 172(c)(9) was moot as applied
to the 2017 milestone year because CARB and the District had
demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones in
the plan had been met. The EPA took no action with respect to the
RFP contingency measures for the 2020 milestone year or attainment
contingency measures for these NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of our July 2, 2020 action, we proposed to approve the
following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the CAA
Moderate area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: The
2012 base year emissions inventories, the reasonably available control
measure/reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT)
demonstration, the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable, the reasonable
further progress (RFP) demonstration, the quantitative milestones, the
motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2019 and 2022, and SCAQMD's
commitments to adopt and implement specific rules and measures to
achieve emission reductions and to submit the rules and measures to
CARB for transmittal to the EPA as a revision to the SIP. We also
proposed to conditionally approve the contingency measure element of
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Serious area planning
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate area
planning requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Lastly, we
proposed to reclassify the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment
area, including reservation areas of Indian country, as Serious
nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 85 FR 40026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the contingency measure requirement, in our
proposed rule, we noted that the EPA's longstanding interpretation of
section 172(c)(9) that states may rely on already-implemented measures
as contingency measures (if they provide emissions reductions in excess
of those needed to meet any other nonattainment plan requirements) was
rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case referred to as
Bahr v. EPA (``Bahr'').\15\ In Bahr, the Ninth Circuit concluded that
contingency measures must be measures that would take effect at the
time the area fails to make RFP or to attain by the applicable
attainment date, not before.\16\ Thus, within the geographic
jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, states cannot rely on already-
implemented control measures to comply with the contingency measure
requirements under CAA sections 172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F. 3d 1218, 1235-1237 (9th Cir. 2016).
\16\ Id. at 1235-1237.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our proposed conditional approval of the contingency measure
element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan relied on specific
commitments: (1) From the District to modify an existing rule, Rule 445
(``Wood Burning Devices''), to lower the wood burning curtailment
threshold upon any of the four EPA determinations (i.e., ``findings of
failure'') listed in 40 CFR 51.1014(a); (2) from the District to submit
the revised rule to CARB for transmittal to the EPA by the earlier of
(a) one year from the date of the EPA's conditional approval of the
contingency measures for the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard, or
(b) 60 days after the date the EPA makes a determination that the South
Coast area has failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards but no later than one year after the date of the EPA's
conditional approval of the contingency measures for these standards;
\17\ and (3) from CARB to submit the revised District rule to the EPA
as a SIP revision by the earlier of these two dates.\18\ For more
information about these submittals, please see our proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB.
\18\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael T. Benjamin,
Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Amy
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX
(transmitting letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to reclassification, in the proposed rule, we
explained that under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date
for a Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the
area's designation as nonattainment. . .'' The EPA designated the South
Coast area as nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard
effective April 15, 2015.\19\ Therefore, as a result of our
reclassification of the South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment
area, the attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December 31, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our proposed rule also identified the Serious area attainment plan
elements that California would, upon reclassification, have to submit
to satisfy the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas,
including the requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the
Act.\20\ The EPA explained that under section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the
State must submit the required provisions to implement best available
control measures (BACM), including best available control technology
(BACT),\21\ no later than 18 months after
[[Page 71266]]
reclassification. Because an up-to-date emissions inventory serves as
the foundation for a state's BACM and BACT determinations, the EPA
proposed to also require the State to submit the emissions inventory
required under CAA section 172(c)(3) within 18 months after the
effective date of final reclassification. Similarly, because an
effective evaluation of BACM and BACT requires evaluation of the
precursor pollutants that must be controlled to provide for expeditious
attainment in the area, the EPA proposed to require the State to submit
any optional precursor insignificance demonstrations by this same date.
The EPA proposed to require the State to submit the attainment
demonstration required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and all other
attainment-related plan elements for the South Coast area no later the
end of the eighth calendar year after designation--i.e., by December
31, 2023. We noted that although section 189(b)(2) generally provides
for up to four years after a discretionary reclassification for the
state to submit the required attainment demonstration, given the timing
of the reclassification action less than two years before the Moderate
area attainment date, it is appropriate in this case for the EPA to
establish an earlier SIP submission deadline to assure timely
implementation of the statutory requirements.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 85 FR 40026.
\21\ The EPA defines BACM as, among other things, the maximum
degree of emissions reduction achievable for a source or source
category, which is determined on a case-by-case basis considering
energy, environmental, and economic impacts. 59 FR 41998, 42010 and
42014 (August 16, 1994). BACM must be implemented for all categories
of sources in a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area unless
the state adequately demonstrates that a particular source category
does not contribute significantly to nonattainment of the
PM2.5 standard. Id. at 42011-42012.
\22\ Id. at 40054-40055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on August 3, 2020. During this period, the EPA received
comments from three anonymous commenters.\23\ None of the comments
received are relevant to the EPA's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The docket for this rulemaking contains these comment
letters, with the exception of sixteen attachments to one comment
letter that contain copyright and trademark claims. The EPA did not
receive any comments regarding the impact of the Safer Affordable
Fuel Efficient (SAFE) actions (84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019) and
85 FR 24174 (April 30, 2020)) on the South Coast 2016
PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Final Action
A. Moderate Area Planning Requirements
For the reasons discussed in detail in the proposed rule and
summarized herein, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is taking final
action to approve or conditionally approve portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan submitted by the State of California. We are
finalizing approval of the following elements of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Moderate area requirements for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS:
The base year emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
the RACM/RACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C);
the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii);
the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(2);
the quantitative milestones as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 189(c);
the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2019 and 2022,
because they are derived from an approvable RFP demonstration and meet
the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A;
\24\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ In our July 2, 2020 action, we proposed to limit the
duration of our approval of the budgets in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan to the period before the effective date of the EPA's adequacy
finding for any subsequently submitted budgets per a request from
CARB (85 FR 40026, 40053). We did not receive any comments on our
proposal to limit the duration of the budgets and are finalizing our
approval of the budgets for this limited period, as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the SCAQMD's commitments to adopt and implement specific
rules and measures in accordance with the schedule provided in Chapter
4 of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to achieve the emission reductions
shown therein, and to submit these rules and measures to CARB for
transmittal to the EPA as a revision to the SIP, as stated on page 9 of
SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 17-2.
The EPA is also finalizing a conditional approval of the
contingency measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. We note
that the EPA determined on September 16, 2020, that the South Coast
area had failed to timely attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,\25\
and that CARB is required to submit specified revisions to Rule 445
(``Wood Burning Devices'') as a SIP revision to the EPA no later than
60 days after this date, consistent with the terms of its commitment
under CAA section 110(k)(4).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 85 FR 57733 (September 16, 2020).
\26\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael T. Benjamin,
Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Amy
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX
(transmitting letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri,
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer,
CARB).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable Attainment
Date
In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is taking
final action to reclassify the South Coast area from Moderate to
Serious nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard,
based on the agency's determination that the South Coast area cannot
practicably attain the standard by the Moderate area attainment date of
December 31, 2021.
Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's
designation as nonattainment . . .'' The South Coast area was
designated nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS effective
April 15, 2015.\27\ Therefore, as a result of our reclassification of
the South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment area, section 188(c)(2)
of the Act requires that the area attain the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31,
2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country
When the South Coast area was designated nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, five Indian tribes were located within the
boundaries of the nonattainment area: The Cahuilla Band of Mission
Indians of the Cahuilla Reservation, the Morongo Band of Mission
Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, the San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. At that time, the main
body of land belonging to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians
of the Pechanga Reservation was expressly excluded from the South Coast
2012 PM2.5 nonattainment area. However, since designation,
the tribe has acquired the Meadowbrook parcel, which is located
approximately 30 miles northwest of the northern boundary of the
Reservation and is located within the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 85 FR 40026, 40055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 71267]]
We have considered the relevance of our final action to reclassify
the South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 standard for each tribe located within the South Coast
area. As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, we believe that
the same facts and circumstances that support the reclassification for
the non-Indian country lands also support reclassification for
reservation areas of Indian country \29\ and any other areas of Indian
country where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has
jurisdiction located within the South Coast nonattainment area.\30\ In
this final action, the EPA is therefore exercising its authority under
CAA section 188(b)(1) to reclassify reservation areas of Indian country
and any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a tribe has
demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction geographically located in
the South Coast nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly
authorizes the EPA to reclassify a nonattainment area--including any
Indian country located within such an area--that the EPA determines
cannot practicably attain the relevant standard by the applicable
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to:
``(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the
issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way running through
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the
borders of the United States whether within the original or
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
\30\ 85 FR 40026, 40055-40056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In light of the considerations outlined above and in our proposed
rulemaking that support retention of a uniformly-classified
PM2.5 nonattainment area, and our finding that it is
impracticable for the area to attain by the applicable attainment date,
we are finalizing our reclassification of the reservation areas of
Indian country and any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a
tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction within the South
Coast nonattainment area to Serious for the 2012 PM2.5
standard.
Generally, the effect of reclassification is to lower the
applicable ``major source'' emissions thresholds for direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for purposes of the
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program and the Title V
operating permit program from 100 tpy to 70 tpy,\31\ thus subjecting
more new or modified stationary sources to these requirements.
Reclassification also lowers the de minimis threshold under the CAA's
General Conformity requirements from 100 tpy to 70 tpy.\32\ In this
case, however, reclassification does not change the ``major source''
thresholds because, as a result of the EPA's January 2016
reclassification of the South Coast area as a ``Serious'' nonattainment
area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the area is already subject
to the 70 tpy major source threshold for Serious PM2.5
nonattainment areas in CAA section 189(b)(3).\33\ Likewise,
reclassification does not affect the applicable General Conformity de
minimis thresholds, because the South Coast area is already subject to
the 70 tpy de minimis threshold for PM2.5 and all
PM2.5 precursors as a result of the EPA's previous
reclassification of the area as Serious for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B).
\32\ 40 CFR part 93, subpart B.
\33\ 81 FR 1514 (January 13, 2016).
\34\ Id. and 40 CFR 93.153(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA contacted tribal officials early in the process of
developing this action to provide time for tribal officials to have
meaningful and timely input into its development.\35\ On March 12,
2020, during two separate conference calls, the EPA participated in
formal consultation with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians and staff-
level consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of
the Pechanga Reservation, following requests from these tribes. During
these calls, EPA staff presented information about the nonattainment
designation for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area
and about the SCAQMD's request, and EPA and tribal representatives
together discussed the tribe's questions about the implications of the
request for each tribe. At the close of each call, the tribes indicated
that they had no further questions and the Morongo Band of Mission
Indians later requested that the EPA close formal consultation. On
April 30, 2020, the EPA sent a letter to the Morongo Band of Mission
Indians closing formal consultation.\36\ No other Indian tribe has
expressed an interest in discussing this action with the EPA. A summary
of the tribal consultation is included in the docket for this
action.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, the EPA
sent letters to tribal officials inviting government-to-government
consultation. These letters can be found in the docket.
\36\ Letter dated April 30, 2020, from Elizabeth Adams,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Robert
Martin, Tribal Chairman, Morongo Band of Mission Indians.
\37\ Memo dated April 14, 2020, from Ashley Graham, Air Planning
Office, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Docket No.
EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We notified tribal officials when the proposed action published in
the Federal Register and continue to invite Indian tribes in the South
Coast to contact the EPA with any questions about the effects of this
reclassification on tribal interests and air quality. We note that
although eligible tribes may seek EPA approval of relevant tribal
programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes will be required to
submit an implementation plan as a result of this reclassification.
D. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
As a consequence of our reclassification of the South Coast area as
a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
California is required to submit additional SIP revisions to satisfy
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious PM2.5
nonattainment areas, including the requirements of subpart 4 of part D,
title I of the Act.
The Serious area SIP elements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
that California is required to submit are as follows:
1. Provisions to assure that BACM, including BACT for stationary
sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than four
years after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
2. A demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2025, or where the state is seeking an extension of
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that
attainment by December 31, 2025 is impracticable and that the plan
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date
practicable and no later than December 31, 2030 (CAA sections
189(b)(1)(A), 188(c)(2), and 188(e));
3. Plan provisions that require RFP (CAA 172(c)(2));
4. Quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every three
years until the area is redesignated attainment and that demonstrate
RFP toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
5. Provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the
state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
6. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of PM2.5 and all PM2.5
precursors in the area (CAA 172(c)(3));
[[Page 71268]]
7. Contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section
172(c)(9)); and
8. A revision to the NNSR program to lower the applicable ``major
stationary source'' \38\ thresholds from 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)) and to satisfy the subpart 4 control requirements for major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors (CAA section
189(e)).\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ For any Serious area, the terms ``major source'' and
``major stationary source'' include any stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 70 tpy of PM10 (CAA
sections 189(b)(3)).
\39\ As discussed in our proposed rule, California submitted
NNSR SIP revisions for the South Coast to address the subpart 4 NNSR
requirements for Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas on May
8, 2017, and the EPA conditionally approved these NNSR SIP revisions
on November 30, 2018 (83 FR 61551). The State fulfilled the
commitment that provided the basis for the EPA's conditional
approval of these NNSR SIP revisions by submitting a revised version
of Rule 1325 (``Federal PM2.5 New Source Review
Program'') on April 24, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above in Section I, section 189(b)(2) of the CAA
requires a state to submit the required BACM provisions no later than
18 months after the effective date of final reclassification. Because
an effective BACM evaluation requires an up-to-date emissions inventory
and an evaluation of the precursor pollutants that must be controlled
to provide for expeditious attainment in the area, we are also
requiring the State to submit the emissions inventory required under
CAA section 172(c)(3) and any optional precursor insignificance
demonstrations by this same date. Although section 189(b)(2) generally
provides for up to four years after a discretionary reclassification
for the state to submit the required attainment demonstration, given
the timing of the reclassification action less than two years before
the Moderate area attainment date, we are establishing a deadline of
December 31, 2023 for the State to submit the attainment demonstration
required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and all other attainment related
plan elements for the South Coast area.
We note that the 2016 PM2.5 Plan submitted on April 27,
2017, includes a Serious area attainment demonstration, an emissions
inventory, attainment-related plan elements, and BACM/BACT provisions,
which the EPA intends to evaluate and act on through subsequent
rulemakings, as appropriate.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves, or conditionally approves, state plans as
meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 CAA; and
Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practical 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 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 8, 2021. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate
matter.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 10, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 71269]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(517)(ii)(B)(7) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(517) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) * * *
(7) The following portions of the ``Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan (March 2017),'' adopted March 3, 2017: Chapter 5
(``PM2.5 Modeling Approach''), pages 5-17 through 5-27;
Appendix III (``Base and Future Year Emission Inventory''), Attachment
A (``Annual Average Emissions by Source Category in South Coast Air
Basin'') for PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and
NH3 for years 2012, 2019, 2021, and 2022, and Attachment D,
tables D-1, D-7, D-11, and D-13; Appendix IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary
and Mobile Source Control Measures''), Table IV-A-4 and Section 2
(``PM2.5 Control Measures''); Appendix IV-C (``Regional
Transportation Strategy and Control Measures''), Section III
(``Reasonably Available Control Measure Analysis''); Appendix V
(``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration''), Chapter 6 (``Annual
PM2.5 Attainment Demonstration'') and Attachment 7 (``Annual
Unmonitored Area Analysis Supplement''); Appendix VI-A (``Reasonably
Available Control Measures (RACM)/Best Available Control Measures
(BACM) Demonstration''), pages VI-A-5 through VI-A-11, pages VI-A-22
through VI-A-32, pages VI-A-36 through VI-A-38, Attachment VI-A-1
(``Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations''), Attachment VI-A-2
(``Control Measure Assessment''), and Attachment VI-A-3 (``California
Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control Measures/
Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment''); Appendix VI-B
(``Impracticability Demonstration for Request for ``Serious''
Classification for 2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard''; Appendix
VI-C (``Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestone Years''), pages
VI-C-5 through VI-C-14, and Attachment VI-C-1 (``California Existing
Mobile Source Control Program''); Appendix VI-D (``General Conformity
and Transportation Conformity Budget''), pages VI-D-2 through VI-D-4,
excluding tables VI-D-1 and VI-D-2; and Appendix VI-F (``PM Precursor
Requirements'').
* * * * *
0
3. Section 52.248 is amended by adding paragraph (k) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.248 Identification of plan--conditional approval.
* * * * *
(k) The EPA is conditionally approving the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the South Coast with respect to the
contingency measure requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) for both the
Serious area plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate
area plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The conditional approval
is based on a commitment from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (District) in a letter dated February 12, 2020, to adopt
specific rule revisions, and a commitment from the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) dated March 3, 2020, to submit the amended
District rule to the EPA by the earlier of one year after the date of
the EPA's conditional approval of the contingency measures for the 2012
annual PM2.5 standard, or 60 days after the date the EPA
determines that the South Coast area has failed to attain the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 standards but no later than one year after the
date of the EPA's conditional approval of the contingency measures for
these standards. The EPA determined on September 16, 2020, that the
South Coast area had failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. Therefore, CARB must submit the amended District rule to the
EPA by November 16, 2020. If the District or CARB fail to meet their
commitments, the conditional approval is treated as a disapproval.
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
0
5. In Sec. 81.305, amend the table ``California--2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary],'' by revising the entries under ``Los
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, CA'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.305 California.
* * * * *
California--2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
[Primary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area \1\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \2\ Type Date \2\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles-South Coast Air
Basin, CA:
Los Angeles County (part)... .................. Nonattainment..... December 9, 2020.. Serious.
[[Page 71270]]
That portion of Los Angeles
County which lies south and
west of a line described as
follows: Beginning at the Los
Angeles-San Bernardino County
boundary and running west along
the Township line common to
Township 3 North and Township 2
North, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian; then north along the
range line common to Range 8
West and Range 9 West; then
west along the Township line
common to Township 4 North and
Township 3 North; then north
along the range line common to
Range 12 West and Range 13 West
to the southeast corner of
Section 12, Township 5 North
and Range 13 West; then west
along the south boundaries of
Sections 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, and
7, Township 5 North and Range
13 West to the boundary of the
Angeles National Forest which
is collinear with the range
line common to Range 13 West
and Range 14 West; then north
and west along the Angeles
National Forest boundary to the
point of intersection with the
Township line common to
Township 7 North and Township 6
North (point is at the
northwest corner of Section 4
in Township 6 North and Range
14 West); then west along the
Township line common to
Township 7 North and Township 6
North; then north along the
range line common to Range 15
West and Range 16 West to the
southeast corner of Section 13,
Township 7 North and Range 16
West; then along the south
boundaries of Sections 13, 14,
15, 16, 17, and 18, Township 7
North and Range 16 West; then
north along the range line
common to Range 16 West and
Range 17 West to the north
boundary of the Angeles
National Forest (collinear with
the Township line common to
Township 8 North and Township 7
North); then west and north
along the Angeles National
Forest boundary to the point of
intersection with the south
boundary of the Rancho La
Liebre Land Grant; then west
and north along this land grant
boundary to the Los Angeles-
Kern County boundary.
Orange County............... .................. Nonattainment..... December 9, 2020.. Serious.
Riverside County (part)..... .................. Nonattainment..... December 9, 2020.. Serious.
That portion of Riverside County
which lies to the west of a
line described as follows:
Beginning at the Riverside-San
Diego County boundary and
running north along the range
line common to Range 4 East and
Range 3 East, San Bernardino
Base and Meridian; then east
along the Township line common
to Township 8 South and
Township 7 South; then north
along the range line common to
Range 5 East and Range 4 East;
then west along the Township
line common to Township 6 South
and Township 7 South to the
southwest corner of Section 34,
Township 6 South, Range 4 East;
then north along the west
boundaries of Sections 34, 27,
22, 15, 10, and 3, Township 6
South, Range 4 East; then west
along the Township line common
to Township 5 South and
Township 6 South; then north
along the range line common to
Range 4 East and Range 3 East;
then west along the south
boundaries of Sections 13, 14,
15, 16, 17, and 18, Township 5
South, Range 3 East; then north
along the range line common to
Range 2 East and Range 3 East;
to the Riverside-San Bernardino
County line.
San Bernardino County (part) .................. Nonattainment..... December 9, 2020.. Serious.
That portion of San Bernardino
County which lies south and
west of a line described as
follows: Beginning at the San
Bernardino-Riverside County
boundary and running north
along the range line common to
Range 3 East and Range 2 East,
San Bernardino Base and
Meridian; then west along the
Township line common to
Township 3 North and Township 2
North to the San Bernardino-Los
Angeles County boundary.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes areas of Indian country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\2\ This date is April 15, 2015, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-23033 Filed 11-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P