[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 225 (Friday, November 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67343-67350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25616]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0543; FRL-8846-02-R9]
Clean Air Plans; California; San Joaquin Valley Moderate Area
Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS; Contingency Measures for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action on all or portions of four state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by California (``State'') to address Clean Air Act
(CAA or ``Act'') requirements for the 2012 fine particulate matter
(``PM2.5'') national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards'') and for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the San
Joaquin Valley (SJV) PM2.5 nonattainment area. Specifically,
the EPA is approving all but the contingency measure element of the
submitted ``Moderate'' area plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
as updated by the submitted ``Serious'' area plan and related
supplement to the State strategy, as meeting all applicable Moderate
area plan requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. In
addition, the EPA is approving 2022 motor vehicle emissions budgets for
use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. The EPA is disapproving the contingency measure element with
respect to the Moderate area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. The EPA is also reclassifying the SJV 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 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 plan for the area that includes a
demonstration of attainment by the applicable Serious area attainment
date, which is no later than December 31, 2025, or by the most
expeditious alternative date practicable. However, we note that
California has already submitted such Serious area plan, which the EPA
will address in a separate rulemaking. Lastly, the EPA is disapproving
the contingency measure element in the Serious area plan for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: This rule is effective on December 27, 2021.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0543. 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: Khoi Nguyen, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415)
947-4120, 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. Approval of the Moderate Area Planning Requirements for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (except the Contingency Measure Element)
[[Page 67344]]
B. Disapproval of the Contingency Measure Elements for the 2006
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
C. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Date for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
D. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
E. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS
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 (NOX), 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. We
refer to these standards as the ``1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.'' 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.\4\ We
refer to this standard as the ``2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.'' 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.\5\ We refer to this standard as the ``2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 62 FR 38652 (codified at 40 CFR 50.7).
\4\ 71 FR 61144 (codified at 40 CFR 50.13).
\5\ 78 FR 3086 (codified at 40 CFR 50.18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 January 15, 2015, the EPA
designated and classified the SJV as Moderate nonattainment for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\6\ With respect to the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the SJV is
designated nonattainment and is classified as Serious.\7\ The SJV
PM2.5 nonattainment area encompasses over 23,000 square
miles and includes all or part of eight counties: San Joaquin,
Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and the valley
portion of Kern.\8\ The area is home to four million people and is the
nation's leading agricultural region. Stretching over 250 miles from
north to south and averaging 80 miles wide, it is partially enclosed by
the Coast Mountain range to the west, the Tehachapi Mountains to the
south, and the Sierra Nevada range to the east.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
\7\ See the tables of area designations for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in 40 CFR 81.305.
\8\ For a precise description of the geographic boundaries of
the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under State law, the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD or ``District'') has primary responsibility
for developing plans to provide for attainment of the NAAQS in this
area. The District works cooperatively with the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) in preparing these plans. Authority for
regulating sources under State jurisdiction in the SJV 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. CARB is
also responsible for adoption and submittal to the EPA of the
California SIP, which includes, among other things, regional air
quality plans. Under CAA section 110(k), the EPA is obligated to
approve or disapprove SIPs and SIP revisions as meeting or failing to
meet CAA requirements.
On September 1, 2021, we proposed to approve or disapprove all or
portions of SIP revisions submitted by CARB to address CAA requirements
for the PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV nonattainment area.\9\
Herein, we refer to our proposed rule published on September 1, 2021,
as the ``proposed rule,'' ``proposal'' or ``proposed action.'' On May
10, 2019, CARB made two SIP submissions intended to address the
attainment plan requirements for areas designated as nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\10\ First, the ``2016 Moderate Area
Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard'' (``2016 PM2.5
Plan'') addresses the Moderate area attainment plan requirements and
includes a demonstration of impracticability of attaining the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV by the latest permissible Moderate
area attainment date of December 31, 2021. In our proposal, the EPA
proposed action on all portions of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
Second, the ``2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5
Standards'' (``2018 PM2.5 Plan'') addresses the Serious area
attainment plan requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, in
anticipation of the reclassification of SJV from Moderate to Serious
for that PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2018 PM2.5 Plan updates
several elements in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, including the base
year emissions inventory, plan precursor demonstration, controls
analysis, reasonable further progress (RFP) and quantitative
milestones, and motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs or ``budgets'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 86 FR 49100.
\10\ CARB submitted the two plans electronically on May 10,
2019, as an attachment to a letter dated May 9, 2019, from Richard
W. Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the 2018 PM2.5 Plan incorporates by
reference the ``San Joaquin Valley Supplement to the 2016 State
Strategy for the State Implementation Plan'' (``Valley State SIP
Strategy''), a related plan adopted by CARB on October 25, 2018, and
submitted to the EPA on May 10, 2019, with the 2018 PM2.5
Plan. For the purposes of this action, the relevant portion of the
Valley State SIP Strategy includes the control measure commitments
associated with the quantitative milestones for 2019 and 2022. Lastly,
with respect to applicable requirements for contingency measures for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we
evaluated the contingency measure elements of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan and 2018 PM2.5 Plan as supplemented by the July 19,
2019 submittal of a SIP revision that includes a contingency provision
(section 5.7.3) in the SJVUAPCD's rule (Rule 4901) limiting emissions
from wood burning fireplaces, wood burning heaters, and outdoor wood
burning devices.
In this document, the EPA is finalizing action on the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and those portions of the 2018 PM2.5
Plan that apply to the Moderate area plan requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. However, the EPA is not, at this time, acting
on those portions of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan that are not
relevant to our evaluation of compliance with Moderate area plan
requirements for
[[Page 67345]]
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, such as the best available control
measures (BACM) demonstration, control strategy commitments, attainment
demonstration, RFP demonstration and quantitative milestones for later
years, and MVEBs for later years. In our proposal, we also proposed
action on the portion of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan that addresses
the contingency measure requirement for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, and we are taking final action on the contingency measure
element for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this document. For more
information about these submittals, please see our proposed rule.
As part of our proposed action, we proposed to approve the
following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and 2018
PM2.5 Plan as meeting the statutory and regulatory Moderate
area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV
nonattainment area: The 2013 base year emissions inventories in the
2016 PM2.5 Plan, as revised in the 2018 PM2.5
Plan; the reasonably available control measures (RACM)/reasonably
available control technology demonstration and additional reasonable
measures for all sources of direct PM2.5 and NOX
in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, as supplemented in the 2018
PM2.5 Plan; the demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan that attainment by the Moderate area attainment date of December
31, 2021, is impracticable; the RFP demonstration in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, as revised in 2018 PM2.5 Plan; the
quantitative milestones in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, as revised
in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan and the Valley State SIP Strategy;
and the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2022 in the 2018
PM2.5 Plan.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ With respect to the budgets, we proposed to limit the
duration of the approval of the budgets to last only until the
effective date of the EPA's adequacy finding for any subsequently
submitted budgets. We proposed to do so at CARB's request and in
light of the benefits of using EMFAC2017-derived budgets prior to
our taking final action on the future SIP revision that includes the
updated budgets. EMFAC2017 is a version of CARB's EMFAC (short for
EMission FACtor) model for use in SIP development and transportation
conformity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In support of our proposed approval of the above SIP elements, we
proposed to approve the demonstrations in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan and the 2018 PM2.5 Plan that emissions of ammonia,
sulfur oxides, and volatile organic compounds do not contribute
significantly to ambient PM2.5 levels that exceed the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV. We also found that the photochemical
modeling in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and 2018 PM2.5
Plan is adequate for the purposes of supporting the RFP demonstration
and the demonstration of impracticability in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan.
The EPA also proposed to disapprove contingency measure elements
because, among other reasons, the elements include no specific measures
to be undertaken if the State fails to submit a quantitative milestone
report for the area, or if the area fails to meet RFP or a quantitative
milestone. Specifically, the proposed disapprovals apply to the 2016
PM2.5 Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as revised
in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan and supplemented by section 5.7.3 of
District Rule 4901 (``Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning
Heaters''),\12\ and the contingency measure element of the 2018
PM2.5 Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, as
supplemented by section 5.7.3 of District Rule 4901. In addition, with
respect to the contingency measure element in the 2018 PM2.5
Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, as supplemented by section
5.7.3 of District Rule 4901, the element includes a specific measure
that may not result in any emissions reductions following a failure to
attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date under certain circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ As explained in our proposed rule, the EPA has taken final
action to approve District Rule 4901 (including section 5.7.3), but
in that approval, we noted that we were not evaluating the
contingency measure in section 5.7.3 of revised Rule 4901 for
compliance with all requirements of the CAA and the EPA's
implementing regulations that apply to such measures. See 86 FR
49132-49134. In this action, we have completed our evaluation and
are disapproving section 5.7.3 of Rule 4901 with respect to
applicable contingency measure requirements for the 2006 and 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the EPA previously approved the Serious area plan RFP and
attainment demonstrations and the MVEBs for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS,\13\ and because we proposed to approve the Moderate area plan
RACM, additional reasonable measures, and RFP demonstrations, and MVEBs
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, we also proposed to issue a
protective finding under 40 CFR 93.120(a)(3) to the disapproval of the
contingency measures elements. As explained in our proposed rule,
without a protective finding, the final disapprovals would result in a
conformity freeze, under which only projects in the first four years of
the most recent conforming Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) can proceed. Generally,
during a freeze, no new RTPs, TIPs, or RTP/TIP amendments can be found
to conform until another control strategy implementation plan revision
fulfilling the same CAA requirements is submitted, the EPA finds its
motor vehicle emissions budget(s) adequate pursuant to section 93.118
or approves the submission, and conformity to the implementation plan
revision is determined.\14\ Under a protective finding, the final
disapproval of the contingency measures elements will not result in a
transportation conformity freeze in the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area and the metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs)
may continue to make transportation conformity determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 85 FR 44192.
\14\ 40 CFR 93.120(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, we proposed to reclassify the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area, including reservation areas of Indian country and
any other area where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that a tribe
has jurisdiction within the SJV, as Serious nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 standard based on the agency's determination that the
SJV cannot practicably attain the standard by the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2021.
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 SJV
as nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard effective April
15, 2015.\15\ Therefore, as a result of our reclassification of the SJV
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 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.
The EPA explained that under section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the state
must submit the required provisions to implement BACM, including best
available control technology (BACT),\16\ no later than 18
[[Page 67346]]
months after 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 also proposed an 18-month deadline for
submittal of any nonattainment new source review (NNSR) SIP revisions
required to satisfy the requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) and
189(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 SJV nonattainment 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.
The EPA also noted in our proposed rule that the 2018
PM2.5 Plan, submitted concurrently with the 2016
PM2.5 Plan on May 10, 2019, includes a Serious area
attainment demonstration, emissions inventory, attainment-related plan
elements, and BACM and BACT provisions. CARB also submitted a SIP
submission for the Serious area NNSR requirements on November 20, 2019.
The EPA intends to evaluate and act on the Serious area plan and NNSR
SIP submissions for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV through
separate rulemakings, as appropriate.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ We are establishing deadlines for submittal of SIP
revisions that have already been submitted to timely address any
elements that may be withdrawn in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please see our September 1, 2021 proposed rule for additional
background and a more detailed explanation of the rationale for our
proposed actions.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on October 1, 2021. During this period, the EPA did not
receive any comments.
III. Final Action
A. Approval of the Moderate Area Planning Requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS (Except the Contingency Measure Element)
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 the following elements of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan and 2018 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Moderate area
requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS:
The 2013 base year emissions inventories in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, as revised in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan, as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR
51.1008(a);
the reasonably available control measures/reasonably
available control technology demonstration and additional reasonable
measures for all sources of direct PM2.5 and NOX
in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan, as supplemented in the 2018
PM2.5 Plan, as meeting the requirements of CAA sections
172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) and 40 CFR 51.1009;
the demonstration in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan 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) and 40 CFR 51.1011(a);
the reasonable further progress demonstration in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan, as revised in 2018 PM2.5 Plan, as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2) and 40 CFR
51.1012(a);
the quantitative milestones in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan, as revised in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan and the Valley State
SIP Strategy, as meeting the requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40
CFR 51.1013(a)(1); and
the following motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2022 in
the 2018 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A: \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The budgets that the EPA is approving relate to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS only, and our approval does not affect the
status of the previously-approved MVEBs for the 1997 annual and 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and
related trading mechanisms that remain in effect for those
PM2.5 NAAQS.
2022 San Joaquin Valley MVEBs for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
[Annual average, tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2022 (post-
attainment year)
County -------------------
PM2.5 NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno.............................................. 0.9 21.2
Kern (San Joaquin Valley portion)................... 0.8 19.4
Kings............................................... 0.2 4.1
Madera.............................................. 0.2 3.5
Merced.............................................. 0.3 7.6
San Joaquin......................................... 0.6 10.0
Stanislaus.......................................... 0.4 8.1
Tulare.............................................. 0.4 6.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2018 PM2.5 Plan, App. D, Table 3-3. Budgets are rounded up to
the nearest tenth.
With respect to the budgets, we are limiting the duration of our
approval of the budgets to last only until the effective date of the
EPA's adequacy finding for any subsequently submitted budgets. Also, we
are approving the 6.5:1 NOX for PM2.5 trading
mechanism as an enforceable component of the transportation conformity
program for the SJV for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore,
we are determining that the submitted 2022 budgets included in the 2018
PM2.5 Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are adequate
for transportation conformity purposes.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii), the EPA's adequacy
determination is effective upon publication of this final rule in
the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Disapproval of the Contingency Measure Elements for the 2006 and
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is finalizing
disapproval of the contingency measure elements for failure to meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) and 40 CFR 51.1014. The
disapproved elements are for the 2016 PM2.5 Plan for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as revised in the 2018 PM2.5
Plan and supplemented by section 5.7.3 of District Rule 4901, and the
contingency measure element of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, as supplemented by section 5.7.3 of
District Rule 4901.
As a consequence of our disapproval, the offset sanction in CAA
section 179(b)(2) will apply in the SJV 18 months after the effective
date of our action, and the highway funding sanctions in CAA section
179(b)(1) will apply in the area six months after the offset sanction
is imposed.\20\ Neither sanction will be imposed under the CAA if the
State submits and we approve, prior to the implementation of the
sanctions, a SIP revision that corrects the deficiencies that we
identify
[[Page 67347]]
in our final action. The EPA intends to work with CARB and the SJVUAPCD
to correct the deficiencies in a timely manner. As noted in our
proposed rule, the EPA is already subject to a statutory deadline to
promulgate a federal implementation plan to address the contingency
measure requirements for San Joaquin Valley for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS due to the prior
finding that California had failed to submit SIP revisions to address
those requirements within the prescribed periods.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 40 CFR 52.31.
\21\ 83 FR 62720 (December 6, 2018) (Finding of failure to
submit certain PM2.5 SIP revisions for San Joaquin
Valley). Also, see the proposed rule at 49135.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is also finalizing our issuance of a protective finding
under 40 CFR 93.120(a)(3) to the disapproval of the contingency measure
elements. Under a protective finding, the final disapproval of the
contingency measures elements will not result in a transportation
conformity freeze in the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area and
the MPOs may continue to make transportation conformity determinations.
C. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable Attainment
Date for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is taking
final action to reclassify the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area
from Moderate to Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5
standard, based on the agency's determination that the SJV cannot
practicably attain the standard by the Moderate area attainment date of
December 31, 2021. Pursuant to section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the
applicable attainment date for SJV as a Serious nonattainment area for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS is as expeditiously as practicable but
no later than December 31, 2025, or by the most expeditious alternative
date practicable and no later than December 31, 2030, in accordance
with the requirements of CAA sections 189(b) and 188(e).
D. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS
When the SJV nonattainment area was designated nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, eight Indian tribes were located
within the boundaries of the nonattainment area. These tribes include
Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians of California, Cold Springs
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, Northfork Rancheria of Mono
Indians of California, Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of
California, Santa Rosa Indian Community of the Santa Rosa Rancheria,
California, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tejon Indian Tribe, and Tule
River Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation, California.
We have considered the relevance of our final action to reclassify
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 standard for each tribe located within the SJV
nonattainment 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 \22\ and any
other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated
that the tribe has jurisdiction located within the SJV nonattainment
area.\23\ 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 SJV nonattainment area to Serious for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 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.\24\
We notified tribal officials when the proposed action published in the
Federal Register and continue to invite Indian tribes in the SJV
nonattainment area 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 the EPA's approval of
relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes
will be required to submit an implementation plan as a result of this
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ``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.''
\23\ 85 FR 40026, 40055-40056.
\24\ As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, the EPA
sent letters dated March 3, 2021, to tribal officials inviting
government-to-government consultation. These letters can be found in
the docket. See also a summary of the EPA's outreach to tribes in
the San Joaquin Valley; memorandum dated August 3, 2021, from Rory
Mays, Air Planning Office, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region
IX, to Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0543. We did not receive any
request for consultation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
As a consequence of our reclassification of the SJV nonattainment
area as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, California is required to submit, within 18 months after the
effective date of the reclassification, an emissions inventory,
provisions to assure that BACM shall be implemented no later than four
years after the date of reclassification, and any NNSR SIP revisions
required to satisfy the requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) and
189(e). California will also be required to submit, by December 31,
2023, a Serious area plan that satisfies the requirements of part D of
title I of the Act. This plan must include a demonstration that the SJV
will attain the 2012 PM2.5 standard as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December 31, 2025, or by the most
expeditious alternative date practicable and no later than December 31,
2030, in accordance with the requirements of CAA sections 189(b) and
188(e). The Serious area must also include plan provisions that require
RFP; 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; 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; and
contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet RFP or
to attain by the applicable attainment date.
We note that the 2018 PM2.5 Plan, submitted concurrently
with the 2016 PM2.5 Plan on May 10, 2019, includes a Serious
area attainment demonstration, emissions inventory, attainment-related
plan elements, and BACM/BACT provisions for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. CARB also submitted a SIP submission for the Serious area NNSR
requirements on November 20, 2019. The EPA intends to evaluate and act
on the Serious area plan and NNSR SIP submissions for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV through separate rulemakings, as
appropriate.
[[Page 67348]]
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action
would approve or disapprove State plans as meeting federal requirements
and would not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. Additionally, this action reclassifies the SJV nonattainment
area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and
does not itself regulate small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. Additionally, this action
reclassifies the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and would not itself impose any federal
intergovernmental mandate. This action does not require any tribe to
submit implementation plans.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that
have Tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the federal government and
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the federal government and Indian Tribes.''
Eight Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the SJV
nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big Sandy
Rancheria of Western Mono Indians of California, the Cold Springs
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Northfork Rancheria of
Mono Indians of California, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi
Indians of California, the Santa Rosa Indian Community of the Santa
Rosa Rancheria, California, the Table Mountain Rancheria, the Tejon
Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian Tribe of the Tule River
Reservation, California.
The EPA's actions on the SIP elements submitted by California to
address the Moderate area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS and the contingency measure requirement for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS do not have tribal implications because 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 actions on the SIP
submittals do not have tribal implications and do not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175.
The EPA has concluded that the reclassification might have tribal
implications for the purposes of Executive Order 13175 but does not
impose substantial direct costs upon the tribes, nor would it preempt
tribal law. The reclassification from Moderate to Serious for a
PM2.5 NAAQS would typically affect the EPA's implementation
of the new source review program because of the lower ``major source''
threshold triggered by reclassification (70 tons per year for direct
PM2.5 and precursors to PM2.5). However, because
the SJV nonattainment area is already classified as Serious for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the lower thresholds already
apply within the nonattainment area, and the reclassification from
Moderate to Serious for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS has no
additional effect. The same is true for any tribal projects that
require federal permits, approvals, or funding. Such projects are
subject to the requirements of the EPA's general conformity rule, and
federal permits, approvals, or funding for the projects would typically
become more difficult to obtain because of the lower de minimis
thresholds triggered by reclassification but, in this case, the lower
de minimis thresholds already apply within the SJV.
Given the potential implications, the EPA contacted tribal
officials during the process of developing the September 1, 2021
proposed rule to provide an opportunity to have meaningful and timely
input into its development. On March 3, 2021, we sent letters to
leaders of the eight tribes with areas of Indian country in the SJV
nonattainment area inviting government-to-government consultation on
the rulemaking effort. We requested that the tribal leaders, or their
designated consultation representatives, notify us of their interest in
government-to-government consultation by April 5, 2021. We did not
receive any request for consultation, and we did not receive any public
comments on our proposed action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it approves or disapproves State plans
implementing a federal standard and reclassifies the SJV nonattainment
area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
triggering Serious area planning requirements under the CAA. This
action does not establish an environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a
[[Page 67349]]
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA has determined that this action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because they do not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action approves or disapproves State plans
implementing a federal standard and reclassifies the SJV nonattainment
area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
triggering additional Serious area planning requirements under the CAA.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
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).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 25, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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: November 17, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons started in the preamble, the EPA amends Chapter I,
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(537)(ii)(A)(7)
and (c)(537)(ii)(B)(3) and (4) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(537) * * *.
(ii) * * *
(A) * * *
(7) ``Appendix H, RFP, Quantitative Milestones, and Contingency,
2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards,
Appendix H Revised February 11, 2020'' (portions pertaining to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS as a Moderate area, only, and excluding section
H.3 (``Contingency Measures'')).
(B) * * *
(3) 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5
Standards (``2018 PM2.5 Plan''), adopted November 15, 2018
(portions pertaining to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as a Moderate
area, only, and excluding Chapter 5 (``Demonstration of Federal
Requirements for 1997 PM2.5 Standards''), Chapter 6
(``Demonstration of Federal Requirements for 2006 PM2.5
Standards'') and Appendix H, section H.3 (``Contingency Measures'')).
(4) 2016 Moderate Area Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard
(``2016 PM2.5 Plan''), adopted September 15, 2016, excluding
section 3.7 (``Contingency Measures'').
* * * * *
0
3. Section 52.237 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(9) and (10) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.237 Part D disapproval.
(a) * * *
(9) The contingency measure portion of the 2016 Moderate Area Plan
for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard (``2016 PM2.5
Plan''), adopted September 15, 2016, as modified by the 2018 Plan for
the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards (``2018
PM2.5 Plan''), adopted November 15, 2018, for San Joaquin
Valley as a Moderate nonattainment area with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
(10) The contingency measure portion of the 2018 Plan for the 1997,
2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards (``2018 PM2.5
Plan''), adopted November 15, 2018, for San Joaquin Valley with respect
to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 52.244 is amended by revising paragraph (f) introductory
text and adding paragraph (f)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.244 Motor vehicle emissions budgets.
* * * * *
(f) Approval of the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the
following PM2.5 reasonable further progress or attainment
SIPs will apply for transportation conformity purposes only until new
budgets based on updated planning data and models have been submitted
and EPA has found the budgets to be adequate for conformity purposes.
* * * * *
(2) San Joaquin Valley, for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS only
(Year 2022 budgets only), approved December 27, 2021.
0
5. Section 52.245 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.245 New Source Review rules.
* * * * *
(f) Within 18 months after the effective date of the
reclassification of the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area from
Moderate to Serious for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, the New Source
Review rules for PM2.5 for the San Joaquin Valley Unified
Air Pollution Control District must be revised and submitted as a SIP
revision. The rules must satisfy the requirements of sections 189(b)(3)
and 189(e) and all other applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act
for implementation of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in nonattainment
areas classified as Serious.
[[Page 67350]]
0
6. Section 52.247 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (f)
and by adding paragraph (o).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 52.247 Control Strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.
* * * * *
(o) Within 18 months after the effective date of the
reclassification of the reclassification of the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, California must adopt and submit an emissions
inventory and provisions to assure that BACM shall be implemented no
later than four years after the date of reclassification. Also, by
December 31, 2023, California must adopt and submit a Serious area plan
that includes an attainment demonstration, a reasonable further
progress plan, quantitative milestones, contingency measures, and such
other measures as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for
attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date, in accordance with the requirements of subparts 1 and
4 of part D, title I of the Clean Air Act.
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
7. 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
8. Section 81.305 is amended in the table under ``California--2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary],'' by revising the entry for
``San Joaquin Valley, 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
San Joaquin Valley, CA:
Fresno County................. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
Kern County (part)............ ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
That portion of Kern
County which lies west
and north of a line
described as follows:
Beginning at the Kern-Los
Angeles County boundary
and running north and
east along the northwest
boundary of the Rancho La
Libre Land Grant to the
point of intersection
with the range line
common to Range 16 West
and Range 17 West, San
Bernardino Base and
Meridian; north along the
range line to the point
of intersection with the
Rancho El Tejon Land
Grant boundary; then
southeast, northeast, and
northwest along the
boundary of the Rancho El
Tejon Land Grant to the
northwest corner of
Section 3, Township 11
North, Range 17 West;
then west 1.2 miles; then
north to the Rancho El
Tejon Land Grant
boundary; then northwest
along the Rancho El Tejon
Land Grant boundary line
to the southeast corner
of Section 34, Township
32 South, Range 30 East,
Mount Diablo Base and
Meridian; then north to
the northwest corner of
Section 35, Township 31
South, Range 30 East;
then northeast along the
boundary of the Rancho El
Tejon Land Grant to the
southwest corner of
Section 18, Township 31
South, Range 31 East;
then east to the
southeast corner of
Section 13, Township 31
South, Range 31 East;
then north along the
range line common to
Range 31 East and Range
32 East, Mount Diablo
Base and Meridian, to the
northwest corner of
Section 6, Township 29
South, Range 32 East;
then east to the
southwest corner of
Section 31, Township 28
South, Range 32 East;
then north along the
range line common to
Range 31 East and Range
32 East to the northwest
corner of Section 6,
Township 28 South, Range
32 East, then west to the
southeast corner of
Section 36, Township 27
South, Range 31 East,
then north along the
range line common to
Range 31 East and Range
32 East to the Kern-
Tulare County boundary.
Kings County.................. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
Madera County................. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
Merced County................. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
San Joaquin County............ ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
Stanislaus County............. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
Tulare County................. ........... Nonattainment........... 12/27/2021 Serious.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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. 2021-25616 Filed 11-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P