[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 30, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5770-5773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-01691]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0630; FRL-11617-01-R9]
Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plan
Submissions for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
Quality Standards; California; Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final action.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to find that California has failed to submit state
implementation plan (SIP) elements required under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or ``Act'') to implement the 2012 national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
(``2012 PM2.5 NAAQS'') in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air
Basin (``South Coast''). California was required to submit a SIP that
meets the Serious area plan requirements for a reasonable further
progress demonstration, quantitative milestones, an attainment
demonstration, and contingency measures for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS by December 31, 2023. The State submitted the required SIP
elements, but subsequently withdrew its submission. If the EPA has not
affirmatively found that the State has submitted a complete SIP to
correct these deficiencies within 18 months of this finding, the offset
sanctions will apply in the area. If within six additional months the
EPA has still not affirmatively determined that the State has submitted
a complete SIP to correct the deficiencies, the highway funding
sanction will apply in the area. No later than two years after the EPA
makes this finding, if the State has not submitted and the EPA has not
approved each of the required SIP elements, the EPA must promulgate a
Federal implementation plan (FIP) to address the remaining
requirements.
DATES: The effective date of this action is February 29, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0630. 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.
[[Page 5771]]
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 a disability 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: Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3964 or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA), U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides that an agency may issue a rule
without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment when
that agency finds for good cause that notice and public procedure are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to public interest. The EPA has
determined that there is a good cause for issuing this finding without
prior proposal and opportunity for comment because there is little or
no judgment involved for the EPA to make a finding of failure to submit
SIPs or elements of SIPs required by the CAA, where states have not
submitted a required SIP revision, made incomplete submissions, or, as
in this case, withdrawn an existing submission by the date specified by
the statute. In such circumstances, the EPA finds that notice and
public procedures are unnecessary and that this constitutes good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Consequences of Findings of Failure to Submit
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Airborne particulate matter (PM) can be composed of a complex
mixture of particles in both solid and liquid form. Particulate matter
can be of different sizes, commonly referred to as ``coarse'' and
``fine'' particles. Fine particles, in general terms, are PM with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers.
For this reason, particles of this size are referred to as
PM2.5.
Under section 109 of the Act, the EPA is required to establish
primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for each
pollutant for which the EPA has issued air quality criteria. The EPA
first promulgated annual and 24- hour NAAQS for PM2.5 in
July 1997 \1\ and then revised the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in
October 2006.\2\ Most recently, on December 14, 2012, the EPA revised
the primary annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level from
15.0 to 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter of air ([mu]g/m\3\) to provide
increased protection against health effects associated with long- and
short-term PM2.5 exposures. The EPA did not revise the
secondary annual PM2.5 standard, which remains at 15.0
[mu]g/m\3\.\3\ In addition, the EPA retained the level and form of the
primary and secondary 24-hour PM2.5 standards to continue to
provide supplemental protection against health and welfare effects
associated with short-term PM2.5 exposures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997).
\2\ 71 FR 61143 (October 17, 2006).
\3\ 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Promulgation of a revised NAAQS triggers a requirement for the EPA
to designate areas of the country as nonattainment, attainment, or
unclassifiable for the standards. As prescribed by CAA section 188(a),
areas designated as nonattainment for a PM2.5 NAAQS are
initially classified as Moderate. The designation and initial
classification for the South Coast as Moderate nonattainment for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS became effective on April 15, 2015.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonattainment areas for PM2.5 are subject to the general
nonattainment area planning requirements of CAA section 172 and to the
PM-specific planning requirements of CAA sections 188-189. On August
24, 2016, the EPA established a final implementation rule
(``PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule'') outlining the attainment
planning and control requirements for current and future
PM2.5 NAAQS.\5\ The PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule
also established the due date for Moderate area PM2.5 SIP
submissions as no later than 18 months from the effective date of area
designations.\6\ Accordingly, the areas designated as nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (with an effective date of April 15,
2015) were required to submit Moderate area attainment plans to EPA no
later than October 15, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final rule; 81 FR
58010 (August 24, 2016).
\6\ 40 CFR 51.1003(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 27, 2017, California submitted the ``Final 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan'' (``2016 Plan''), as adopted on March 3, 2017,
by the Governing Board for the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD or ``District'') to the EPA to address CAA
requirements associated with the 2012 PM2.5 standard.\7\ The
2016 Plan included a demonstration, consistent with the requirements of
CAA section 189(a)(1)(B), that attainment of the 2012 PM2.5
standard by the December 31, 2021, Moderate area attainment date was
impracticable, despite the implementation of required control
measures.\8\ The 2016 Plan also included a request that the EPA
reclassify the nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious, and
included a Serious area attainment demonstration, an emissions
inventory, attainment related plan elements, and control measure
provisions.\9\ Effective December 9, 2020, we approved or conditionally
approved the portions of the 2016 Plan that addressed the CAA Moderate
area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South
Coast nonattainment area and reclassified the South Coast as a Serious
nonattainment area under CAA section 188(b)(1).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 85 FR 71264 (November 9, 2020). For additional background,
see the associated proposed rulemaking at 85 FR 40026 (July 2,
2020).
\8\ Id. at 71266.
\9\ Id. at 71268.
\10\ 85 FR 71264.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our final action on the 2016 Plan's Moderate area requirements and
reclassification of the nonattainment area to Serious also noted that
the submitted 2016 Plan included Serious area planning elements for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and stated that we would evaluate and act
on them through subsequent rulemakings as appropriate.\11\ At the same
time, our final action explained that our reclassification of the South
Coast nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS triggered statutory and regulatory timelines for
submittal of Serious area planning elements. Specifically, we stated
that section 189(b)(2) of the CAA requires a state to submit the
required best available control measure (BACM) provisions no later than
18 months after the effective date of final reclassification (i.e.,
June 9, 2022). Because an effective BACM evaluation requires an up-to-
date emissions inventory and an evaluation of the precursor pollutants
that must be controlled to provide for expeditious attainment, we also
required the State to submit the emissions inventory required
[[Page 5772]]
under CAA section 172(c)(3) and any optional precursor demonstrations
by this same date. In addition, we established a deadline of December
31, 2023, for the submittal of the attainment demonstration and all
other attainment-related plan elements.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id. at 71268.
\12\ 85 FR 71268. The Serious area SIP elements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS include provisions to assure that best
available control measures (including best available control
technology) shall be implemented no later than four years after the
area is reclassified, a base year emissions inventory, an attainment
projected emissions inventory, an attainment demonstration with air
quality modeling, a reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstration,
quantitative milestones, contingency measures, and a nonattainment
new source review (NNSR) program with the major source threshold set
at 70 tons per year. CAA section 189(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 29, 2023, the State of California and the District
notified the EPA of their determination that the portions of the 2016
Plan relating to Serious area planning elements for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS were no longer appropriate for inclusion in the
SIP and requested that those portions of the submittal be considered
withdrawn.13 14 Shortly thereafter, we issued a finding that
California had failed to submit the BACM and emissions inventory (EI)
plan elements that were due on June 9, 2022.\15\ The remaining plan
elements, which were due on December 31, 2023, are the subject of this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Letter dated March 8, 2023, from Sarah Rees, Ph.D., Deputy
Executive Officer, Planning, Rule Development & Implementation,
South Coast Air Quality Management District to Michael Benjamin, D.
Env., Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, California
Air Resources Board.
\14\ Letter dated March 29, 2023, from Michael Benjamin, Chief,
Air Quality Planning and Science Division, California Air Resources
Board to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
\15\ 88 FR 34093 (May 26, 2023), effective June 26, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit
For plan requirements under part D, title I of the CAA, such as
those for PM2.5 nonattainment areas, if the EPA finds that a
state has failed to make the required SIP submission, then CAA section
179 establishes specific consequences, including the eventual
imposition of mandatory sanctions for the affected area. Additionally,
such a finding triggers an obligation under CAA section 110(c) for the
EPA to promulgate a FIP no later than two years from the effective date
of the finding, if the affected state has not submitted, and the EPA
has not approved, the required SIP submissions.
If the EPA has not affirmatively determined that a state has
submitted a complete SIP addressing the deficiency that is the basis
for these findings within 18 months of the effective date of this
rulemaking, pursuant to CAA sections 179(a) and (b) and 40 CFR 52.31,
the emissions offset sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) will
apply to the affected nonattainment area. If the EPA has not
affirmatively determined that the state has submitted a complete SIP
addressing the deficiency that is the basis for these findings within
six months after the offset sanction is imposed, the highway funding
sanction will apply in the affected nonattainment area, in accordance
with CAA section 179(b)(1) and 40 CFR 52.31. The State must make the
required SIP submission and the EPA must take final action to approve
the submission within two years of the effective date of this finding;
otherwise, the EPA is required to promulgate a FIP to address the
relevant requirements. This is required pursuant to CAA section 110(c)
for the affected nonattainment area.
Based upon the withdrawal of the Serious area plan elements
submitted with the 2016 Plan as described in section I of this
rulemaking, the EPA is finding that California has failed to make the
following required submittals for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for
the South Coast nonattainment area: (1) reasonable further progress
demonstration, (2) quantitative milestones, (3) attainment
demonstration, and (4) contingency measures. These required elements
were due on December 31, 2023. With this finding, section 179 of the
CAA starts sanctions clocks and a FIP clock. California may avoid these
sanctions by taking timely action to remedy this finding. The clock
governing the CAA's imposition of sanctions for these areas will stop
and sanctions will not take effect if the EPA finds that the State has
made a complete SIP submission addressing the reasonable further
progress demonstration, quantitative milestones, attainment
demonstration, and contingency measures requirements for this area
within 18 months of the date of this finding. Similarly, the EPA is not
required to promulgate a FIP if California makes the required SIP
submissions and the EPA takes final action to approve the submissions
within two years of this finding of failure to submit a required SIP.
In sum, the CAA does not require sanctions or a FIP if the State and
the EPA take timely action to remedy this finding.
III. Final Action
In this action, the EPA is finding that California has failed to
submit certain Serious area SIP elements for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS required under subpart 4 of part D of title I of the CAA.
Specifically, following the March 2023 withdrawal, the EPA finds that
California failed to submit the elements that were due no later than
December 31, 2023, including an attainment demonstration, a reasonable
further progress plan, quantitative milestones, and contingency
measures. The consequences of this finding are discussed in Section II
of this action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov//laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.gov.
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 provisions of the PRA because it 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 beyond those
imposed by state law.
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. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.
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.
[[Page 5773]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because this action does not 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, and will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health 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 does impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
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 significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer 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
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in
this action. Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action
because the EPA is performing a non-discretionary duty to find that a
required State submission was not timely submitted, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent with the stated goals of E.O.
12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and indigenous peoples.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. 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 April 1, 2024. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Approval and promulgation of implementation
plans, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 23, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-01691 Filed 1-29-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P