[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