Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; 2007 South Coast State Implementation Plan for 1997 Fine Particulate Matter Standards; 2007 State Strategy; PM2., 71294-71316 [2010-29235]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
71294
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0366; FRL–9229–3]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
California; 2007 South Coast State
Implementation Plan for 1997 Fine
Particulate Matter Standards; 2007
State Strategy; PM2.5
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
in part and disapprove in part State
implementation plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of California to
provide for attainment of the 1997
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air
Basin area (South Coast nonattainment
area). The submitted SIP revisions are
contained in the South Coast 2007 Air
Quality Management Plan (South Coast
2007 AQMP) and portions of the 2007
State Strategy as revised in 2009.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve the emissions inventories as
meeting the requirements of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s fine
particulate implementing regulations.
EPA is also proposing to approve
commitments to propose specific
measures and meet specific aggregate
emissions reductions by the South Coast
Air Quality Management (District) and
the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) because the commitments
strengthen the SIP. Finally, EPA is
proposing to approve the air quality
modeling demonstration as meeting the
requirements of the CAA and EPA
guidance. EPA is proposing to
disapprove the attainment
demonstration because it does not
provide sufficient emissions reductions
from adopted and EPA approved
measures to provide for attainment of
the NAAQS. As a result, EPA is also
proposing to disapprove the reasonably
available control measures/reasonably
available control technology (RACM/
RACT) and reasonable further progress
(RFP) demonstrations and proposing not
to grant California’s request to extend to
April 5, 2015 the deadline for the South
Coast nonattainment area to attain the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS because these
requirements are linked to approving
the attainment demonstration under the
1997 PM2.5 implementation rule. We are
also proposing to disapprove the
assignment of 10 tpd of NOX to the
federal government. Finally, EPA is
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
proposing to disapprove PM2.5
contingency measures and the motor
vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) for
the area’s RFP years and attainment
year. To the extent that the State can
remedy the shortfall in emissions
reductions for the attainment
demonstration, which is the basis for
the proposed disapproval of the
attainment demonstration, EPA believes
that many of the noted deficiencies
could be addressed.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
January 21, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2009–0366, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
• E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov.
• Mail or deliver: Marty Robin, Office
of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and
EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide
it in the body of your comment. If you
send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comments due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web site
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some
may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
section
below.
Copies of the SIP materials are also
available for inspection at the following
locations:
• California Air Resources Board,
2020 L Street, Sacramento, California
95812, and
• South Coast Air Quality
Management District, 21865 E. Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
The SIP materials are also
electronically available at: https://
aqmd.gov/aqmp/07aqmp/
and https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/
sip/sip.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR–
2), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, (415) 947–4192,
tax.wienke@epa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Table of Contents
I. The PM2.5 NAAQS and the South Coast
PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
II. California’s State Implementation Plan
Submittals to Address PM2.5 Attainment
in the South Coast Nonattainment Area
A. California’s SIP Submittals
1. 2007 South Coast AQMP
2. 2007 State Strategy
3. Additional SIP Submittal Related to
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
(Budgets)
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for
PM2.5 Attainment SIPs
IV. Review of the South Coast 2007 AQMP
and the South Coast Portion of the
Revised 2007 State Strategy
A. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Actions
B. Emission Inventories
1. Requirements for Emission Inventories
2. Emission Inventories in the South Coast
2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the Emission
Inventories
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM)/Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) and Adopted
Control Strategy
1. Requirement for RACM/RACT
2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the SIP
a. District’s RACM/RACT Analysis and
Adopted Control Strategy
b. CARB’s RACM Analysis and Adopted
Control Strategy
c. The Local Jurisdiction’s RACM Analysis
3. Proposed Actions on RACM/RACT
Demonstration and Adopted Control
Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for Attainment
Demonstration
2. Air Quality Modeling in the South Coast
2007 AQMP
3. PM2.5 Precursors Addressed in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP
4. Extension of the Attainment Date
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
5. Attainment Demonstration
a. Enforceable Commitments
i. The Commitments Do Not Represent a
Limited Portion of Required Reductions
ii. The State Is Capable of Fulfilling Its
Commitment
iii. The Commitment Is for a Reasonable
and Appropriate Period of Time
b. Federal Reductions
6. Proposed Action on the Attainment
Demonstration
E. Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstration
1. Requirements for RFP
2. RFP Demonstration in the South Coast
2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the RFP
Demonstration
F. Contingency Measures
1. Requirements for Contingency Measures
2. Contingency Measures in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the Contingency
Measures
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
H. Mid-Course Review
V. EPA’s Proposed Actions
A. EPA’s Proposed Approvals and
Disapprovals
B. CAA Consequences of a Final
Disapproval
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The PM2.5 NAAQS and the South
Coast PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA
established new national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5,
particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5
microns or less, including annual
standards of 15.0 μg/m3 based on a
3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and 24-hour (or daily)
standards of 65 μg/m3 based on a 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. 40 CFR 50.7 EPA
established the standards based on
substantial evidence from numerous
health studies demonstrating that
serious health effects are associated
with exposures to PM2.5 concentrations
above the levels of these standards.
Epidemiological studies have shown
statistically significant correlations
between elevated PM2.5 levels and
premature mortality. Other important
health effects associated with PM2.5
exposure include aggravation of
respiratory and cardiovascular disease
(as indicated by increased hospital
admissions, emergency room visits,
absences from school or work, and
restricted activity days), changes in lung
function and increased respiratory
symptoms, as well as new evidence for
more subtle indicators of cardiovascular
health. Individuals particularly
sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung
disease, and children. See, EPA, Air
Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:55 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
No. EPA/600/P–99/002aF and EPA/600/
P–99/002bF, October 2004.
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the
atmosphere as a solid or liquid particle
(‘‘primary’’ or ‘‘direct PM2.5’’) or can be
formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions from
precursor emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and
ammonia (NH3) (‘‘secondary PM2.5’’). See
72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007)
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required by
CAA section 107(d) to designate areas
throughout the United States as
attaining or not attaining the NAAQS.
On January 5, 2005, EPA published
initial air quality designations for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, based on air quality
monitoring data for three-year periods of
2001–2003 or 2002–2004. (70 FR 944).
These designations became effective on
April 5, 2005.
EPA designated the ‘‘Los AngelesSouth Coast Air Basin’’ area (South
Coast nonattainment area), including
Orange County, the southwestern twothirds of Los Angeles County,
southwestern San Bernardino County,
and western Riverside County as
nonattainment for both the 1997 24hour and the annual PM2.5 standards.
The South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment
area is home to about 17 million people,
has a diverse economic base, and
contains one of the highest-volume port
areas in the world. For a precise
description of the geographic
boundaries of the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area, See 40 CFR
81.305.1 The local air district with
primary responsibility for developing a
plan to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS in this
area is the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (District).
Ambient annual PM2.5 levels in the
South Coast are among the highest
recorded in the United States at 18.8
μg/m3 for the 2007–2009 period.2 In the
South Coast, the levels and composition
1 On
October 17, 2006, EPA strengthened the 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the level to 35 μg/
m3. At the same time, we retained the level of the
annual PM2.5 standard at 15.0 μg/m3. 71 FR 61144.
On November 13, 2009, EPA designated areas,
including the South Coast, with respect to the
revised 24-hour NAAQS. 74 FR 58688. California is
now required to submit an attainment plan for the
35 μg/m3 standards by December 14, 2012. In this
preamble, all references to the PM2.5 NAAQS,
unless otherwise specified, are to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 standards of 65 μg/m3 and annual standards
of 15 μg/m3.
2 See the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS)
Preliminary Design Value Report dated August 26,
2010 in the docket for today’s action. 18.8 μg/m3
is the highest design value in the South Coast
nonattainment area. The design value is the three
year average of annual means of a single monitoring
site. (See 40 CFR 50 Appendix N Section 1(c)(1)).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71295
of PM2.5 differ by geographic location,
with higher PM2.5 concentrations
typically occurring in metropolitan Los
Angeles and in the inland valley areas
of San Bernardino and metropolitan
Riverside Counties. The higher PM2.5
concentrations in Los Angeles County
are mainly due to secondary formation
of particulates. See South Coast 2007
AQMP, pages 2–13.
II. California’s State Implementation
Plan Submissions to Address PM2.5
Nonattainment in the South Coast
Nonattainment Area
A. California’s SIP Submittals
Designation of an area as
nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to EPA a
State implementation plan (SIP) under
title 1, part D of the CAA. This SIP must
include, among other things, a
demonstration of how the NAAQS will
be attained in the nonattainment area as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later
than the date required by the CAA.
Under CAA section 172(b), a State has
up to three years after an area’s
designation to nonattainment to submit
its SIP to EPA. For the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, these nonattainment SIPs were
due no later than April 5, 2008.
California has made several SIP
submittals to address PM2.5
nonattainment in the South Coast
nonattainment area. The two principal
ones are the District’s 2007 PM2.5 Plan
(South Coast 2007 AQMP) and the
CARB’s State Strategy for California’s
2007 State Implementation Plan (2007
State Strategy).
1. 2007 South Coast AQMP
On November 28, 2007, the California
Air Resources Board (CARB or State)
submitted the ‘‘Final 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan, June 2007.’’ 3 This
Plan was adopted by the District on June
1, 2007 and submitted to CARB on
October 24, 2007.4 The South Coast
3 The South Coast 2007 AQMP is the first South
Coast Plan to address PM2.5. We have previously
acted on numerous South Coast air quality plans for
ozone, PM–10, carbon monoxide, and NO2, such as
the 1997/1999 AQMP. We approved the ozone
portion of the 1997 South Coast AQMP, as amended
in 1999, on April 10, 2000 (See 65 FR 18903). Our
most recent action on a SIP addressing the CAA
requirements for the South Coast ozone
nonattainment area was our partial approval and
partial disapproval of the 2003 AQMP (See 74 FR
10176, March 10, 2009). Because the District
prepares integrated plans that address multiple
pollutants, and also controls VOC and NOX as
precursors to PM2.5, we will refer to control
measures and control measure commitments from
the 2003 AQMP further in this notice.
4 See November 28, 2007 letter to Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, from James
N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, with
enclosures.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71296
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
2007 AQMP includes a PM2.5 attainment
demonstration for the South Coast. In
order to meet relevant CAA
requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS, the
South Coast 2007 AQMP includes base
and projected year PM2.5 emissions
inventories for the South Coast
nonattainment area; air quality
monitoring data; short-, medium- and
long-term District control measures; a
summary of CARB’s control measures;
transportation control measures (TCMs);
a demonstration of RFP; a modeled
attainment demonstration; a
demonstration of RACM/RACT;
contingency measures for the 1997
PM2.5 RFP and for attainment for the
South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area;
and a request to extend the attainment
date for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS to April
5, 2015.5 The South Coast 2007 AQMP
submittal also includes District
Governing Board Resolution 07–9
adopting the final South Coast 2007
AQMP. The South Coast 2007 AQMP
also contains documentation of the
District’s public process, including
written responses to all public
comments received.
2. 2007 State Strategy
To demonstrate attainment, the South
Coast 2007 AQMP relies in part on
measures in the 2007 State Strategy. The
2007 State Strategy was adopted by
CARB on September 27, 2007 and
submitted to EPA on November 16,
2007.6 It discusses CARB’s overall
approach to addressing, in conjunction
with local plans, attainment of both the
1997 PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS
not only in the South Coast
nonattainment area but also in
California’s other nonattainment areas
such as the San Joaquin Valley and the
Sacramento area. It also includes
CARB’s commitments to propose 15
defined State measures7 and to obtain
specific amounts of aggregate emissions
reductions of direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC
and SOX in the South Coast from
sources under the State’s jurisdiction,
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
5 While
the attainment date for PM2.5 areas with
a full five-year extension would be April 5 2015,
reductions must be implemented by 2014 to achieve
attainment by that date. See 40 CFR 51.1007(b). We
refer, therefore, to 2014 as the ‘‘attainment year’’ and
April 5, 2015 as the ‘‘attainment date.’’
6 See CARB Resolution No. 07–28, September 27,
2007 with attachments and letter from James N.
Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, to Wayne
Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9,
November 16, 2007 with enclosures.
7 The 2007 State Strategy also includes measures
to be implemented by the California Bureau of
Automotive Repair (Smog Check improvements)
and the California Department of Pesticide
Regulation (VOC reductions from pesticide use).
See 2007 State Strategy, p. 64–65 and CARB
Resolution 7–28, Attachment B, p. 8.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
primarily on- and off-road motor
vehicles and engines.
On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted
the ‘‘Status Report on the State Strategy
for California’s 2007 State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and
Proposed Revision to the SIP Reflecting
Implementation of the 2007 State
Strategy’’, dated March 24, 2009,
adopted April 24, 2009 (‘‘2009 State
Strategy Status Report’’),8 which updates
the 2007 State Strategy to reflect its
implementation during 2007 and 2008.
In today’s proposal, we are evaluating
only those portions of the 2007 State
Strategy as revised in 2009 9 that are
relevant for attainment of the 1997 PM2.5
standards in the South Coast.
3. Additional SIP Submittal Related to
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
(Budgets)
In addition to the SIP submittals for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS mentioned
above, on April 4, 2008, the District
Governing Board approved an
alternative approach for transportation
conformity motor vehicle emission
budgets for the South Coast
nonattainment area. This new approach
was based on the 2007 SIP baseline
emissions reflecting only the regulations
adopted as of October 2006 for all
milestone years up to the attainment
years. The CARB Governing Board
approved Resolution 08–27 itemizing
the modifications to the South Coast
nonattainment area transportation
conformity emission budgets. The
revised PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions
budgets were submitted as an
amendment to the California SIP on
April 30, 2008. We are acting on those
budgets today.
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and
110(l) require a state to provide
reasonable public notice and
opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submittal of a SIP or
SIP revision. To meet this requirement,
every SIP submittal should include
evidence that adequate public notice
was given and a public hearing was held
consistent with EPA’s implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
Both the District and CARB have
satisfied applicable statutory and
8 See CARB Resolution No. 09–34, April 24, 2009
and letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer,
CARB to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 9, August 12, 2009 with enclosures.
Only pages 11–27 of the 2009 State Strategy Status
Report are submitted as a SIP revision. The balance
of the report is for informational purposes only. See
Attachment A to CARB Resolution No. 09–34.
9 We will also refer to the 2007 State Strategy as
revised in 2009 as the ‘‘revised 2007 State Strategy.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
regulatory requirements for reasonable
public notice and hearing prior to
adoption and submittal of the South
Coast 2007 AQMP. The District
conducted public workshops, provided
public comment periods, and held
public hearings prior to the adoption of
the South Coast 2007 AQMP on June 1,
2007 (District Governing Board
Resolution No. 07–9). CARB provided
the required public notice and
opportunity for public comment prior to
its September 27, 2007 public hearing
on the plan. See CARB Resolution No.
07–41.
CARB conducted public workshops,
provided public comment periods, and
held a public hearing prior to the
adoption of the 2007 State Strategy on
September 27, 2007. (CARB Resolution
No. 07–28). CARB also provided the
required public notice, opportunity for
public comment, and a public hearing
prior to its April 24, 2009 adoption of
the 2009 State Strategy Status Report.
See CARB Resolution 09–34, April 24,
2009.
The SIP submittals include proof of
publication for notices of the District
and CARB public hearings, as evidence
that all hearings were properly noticed.
We therefore find that the submittals
meet the procedural requirements of
CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires
EPA to determine whether a SIP
submittal is complete within 60 days of
receipt. This section also provides that
any plan that EPA has not affirmatively
determined to be complete or
incomplete will become complete 6
months after the date of submittal by
operation of law. EPA’s SIP
completeness criteria are found in 40
CFR part 51, Appendix V.
The South Coast 2007 AQMP became
complete by operation of law on May
28, 2008. The November 16, 2007
submission of the 2007 State Strategy
and the 2009 revisions to the Strategy
became complete by operation of law on
May 16, 2008 and February 12, 2010,
respectively.
III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements
for PM2.5 Attainment SIPs
EPA is implementing the PM2.5
NAAQS under Title 1, Part D, subpart
1 of the CAA, which includes section
172, ‘‘Nonattainment plan provisions.’’
Section 172(a)(2) establishes the
attainment date for a PM2.5
nonattainment area ‘‘as expeditiously as
practicable’’ but no later than five years
after the area’s designation as
nonattainment. This section also allows
EPA to grant up to a five-year extension
of an area’s attainment date based on the
severity of the area’s nonattainment and
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
the availability and feasibility of
controls. EPA designated the South
Coast as a nonattainment area effective
April 5, 2005, and thus the applicable
attainment date is no later than April 5,
2010 or, should EPA grant a full fiveyear extension, no later than April 5,
2015.
Section 172(c) contains the general
statutory planning requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas,
including the requirements for
emissions inventories, RACM/RACT,
attainment demonstrations, RFP
demonstrations, and contingency
measures.
On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the
Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation
Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 72 FR
20586, codified at 40 CFR part 51,
subpart Z (PM2.5 implementation rule).
The PM2.5 implementation rule and its
preamble address the statutory planning
requirements for emissions inventories,
RACM/RACT, attainment
demonstrations including air quality
modeling requirements, RFP
demonstrations, and contingency
measures. This rule also addresses other
matters such as which PM2.5 precursors
must be addressed by the State in its
PM2.5 attainment SIP, applicable
attainment dates, and the requirement
for mid-course reviews.10 We will
discuss each of these CAA and
regulatory requirements for attainment
plans in more detail below.
10 In June 2007, a petition to the EPA
Administrator was filed on behalf of several public
health and environmental groups requesting
reconsideration of four provisions in the PM2.5
implementation rule. See EarthJustice, Petition for
Reconsideration, ‘‘In the Matter of Final Clean Air
Fine Particle Implementation Rule,’’ June 25, 2007.
These provisions are (1) the presumption that
compliance with the Clean Air Interstate Rule
satisfies the NOX and SO2 RACT requirements for
electric generating units; (2) the deferral of the
requirement to establish emission limits for
condensable particulate matter (CPM) until January
1, 2011; (3) revisions to the criteria for analyzing the
economic feasibility of RACT; and (4) the use of
out-of-area emissions reductions to demonstrate
RFP. These provisions are found in the PM2.5
implementation rule and preamble at 20623–20628,
40 CFR 51.1002(c), 20619–20620, and 20636,
respectively. On May 13, 2010, EPA granted the
petition with respect to the fourth issue. Letter,
Gina McCarthy, EPA, to David Baron and Paul Cort,
Earthjustice, May 13, 2010. EPA is currently
considering the other issues raised in the petition.
Neither the District nor the State relied on the
first, third, or fourth of these provisions in
preparing the South Coast 2007 AQMP or 2007
State Strategy. The District has deferred CPM limits
in its rules. EPA does not believe that this deferral
adversely affects the Plan’s RACT or expeditious
attainment demonstrations. See section II.D.3 of the
TSD for this proposal. EPA will evaluate any rule
adopted or revised by the District after January 1,
2011 to assure that it appropriately addresses CPM.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
IV. Review of the South Coast 2007
AQMP and the South Coast Portion of
the 2007 State Strategy
A. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to approve in part
and disapprove in part those portions of
the South Coast 2007 AQMP and those
portions of the 2007 State Strategy as
revised in 2009 specific to the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast. We
are proposing to approve the base year
and baseline emissions inventories in
these SIP revisions as meeting the
applicable requirements of the CAA and
the PM2.5 implementation rule. We are
also proposing to approve the District’s
and CARB’s commitments to propose
specific measures and to meet specific
aggregate emissions reductions in these
revisions as strengthening the SIP, as
well as the District’s air quality
modeling demonstration as meeting the
applicable requirements of the CAA and
EPA guidance.
We are proposing to disapprove the
attainment demonstration, RACM/RACT
analysis, RFP demonstration, and
California’s request to extend the
attainment date to 2015 as not meeting
the applicable requirements of the CAA
and the PM2.5 implementation rule
because they are dependent on the
approval of the attainment
demonstration (See 40 CFR 51.1009 and
51.1010). For the attainment
demonstration, we are proposing to
approve the air quality modeling, but
we are proposing to disapprove the
overall demonstration because it relies
too extensively on commitments to
emissions reductions in lieu of fully
adopted and submitted rules. Rules that
have either not been adopted in final
form or have not been submitted to EPA
cannot be credited toward the
attainment demonstration. We are
proposing to disapprove the motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the RFP
milestone years and the attainment year,
because they are derived from RFP and
attainment demonstrations which we
are proposing to disapprove. Finally, we
are proposing to disapprove the RFP
and attainment contingency measures as
not meeting the applicable requirements
of the CAA and the PM2.5
implementation rule. To the extent that
the State can remedy the shortfall in
emissions reductions for the attainment
demonstration, which is the basis for
the proposed disapproval of the
attainment demonstration, EPA believes
that many of the noted deficiencies
could be addressed.
EPA’s analysis and findings are
summarized below and are described in
more detail in the technical support
document (TSD) for this proposal,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71297
which is available on line at https://
www.regulations.gov in the docket for
this proposal (EPA–R09–OAR–2009–
0366), or from the EPA contact listed at
the beginning of this notice.
B. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions
Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires states
to submit a ‘‘comprehensive, accurate,
current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of the relevant
pollutant.’’ The PM2.5 implementation
rule requires states to include direct
PM2.5 emissions and emissions of all
PM2.5 precursors in this inventory, even
if it has determined that control of any
of these precursors is not necessary for
expeditious attainment. 40 CFR
§ 51.1008(a)(2) and 72 FR 20586, at
20648. Direct PM2.5 includes
condensable particulate matter. See 40
CFR 51.1000. PM2.5 precursors are NOX,
SO2, VOC, and ammonia (NH3).11 Id.
The inventories should meet the data
requirements of EPA’s Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (codified at
40 CFR part 51 subpart A) and include
any additional inventory information
needed to support the SIP’s attainment
demonstration and (where applicable)
RFP demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1) and (2).
A baseline emission inventory is
required for the attainment
demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. As determined on the
date of designation, the base year for
this inventory should be the most recent
calendar year for which a complete
inventory was required to be submitted
to EPA. The baseline emission inventory
for calendar year 2002 or other suitable
year should be used for attainment
planning and RFP plans for areas
initially designated nonattainment for
the PM2.5 NAAQS in 2005. 40 CFR
51.1008(b).
EPA has provided additional
guidance for PM2.5 emission inventories
in ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and
Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional
Haze Regulations,’’ November 2005
(EPA–454/R–05–001).
2. Emissions Inventories in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP
The baseline planning inventories for
direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors for
the South Coast nonattainment area
together with additional documentation
for the inventories are found in
11 The District controls sulfur oxides (SO ),
X
which includes SO2, and considers the two terms
interchangeable for emissions purposes. We will
use SOX in this notice.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71298
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Appendix III of the South Coast 2007
AQMP. Average annual day baseline
inventories are provided for the years
2002, 2005 (the reference year for the air
quality modeling) and for the years
2008, 2010, 2011, and 2014. The
baseline inventories incorporate
reductions from federal, state, and
District measures adopted prior to 2007
(‘‘baseline measures’’). South Coast 2007
AQMP, page 3–1. The District also
provided both summer and winter
planning inventories for PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors. South Coast 2007
AQMP, Appendix III, page III–1–23.
Table 1 is a summary of the average
annual day inventories for directlyemitted PM2.5 and for the PM2.5
precursors NOX, VOC, and SOX for the
baseline modeling year of 2005 and the
targeted attainment year of 2014 from
the South Coast 2007 AQMP (derived
from Appendix A, Table A–2). It is these
inventories that provide the basis for the
control measure analysis and the RFP
and attainment demonstrations in the
South Coast 2007 AQMP.
TABLE 1—SOUTH COAST NONATTAINMENT AREA EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARY FOR PM2.5 AND PM2.5 PRECURSORS
FOR THE 2005 BASELINE YEAR AND 2014 ATTAINMENT YEAR
[Annual average day emissions in tons per day] a
VOC
NOX
PM2.5
SOX
NH3
Emissions inventory category
2005
2014
2005
2014
2005
2014
2005
2014
2005
2014
Stationary/Areawide Sources ...............................................
On-road Mobile Sources ......................................................
Off-road Mobile Sources ......................................................
87
526
360
71
287
293
259
264
208
260
159
157
58
20
22
63
17
18
22
4
37
17
2
25
75
29
n/a
68
15
n/a
Total ..............................................................................
972
650
731
566
101
98
63
45
104
83
a Numbers
may not add due to rounding.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
As a starting point for the South Coast
2007 AQMP’s inventories, the District
used CARB’s 2002 base year inventory.
An example of this inventory and
CARB’s documentation for its
inventories can be found in Appendices
A and F, respectively, of the 2007 State
Strategy. The 2002 inventory for the
South Coast nonattainment area was
projected to 2005 and future years using
CARB’s California Emission Forecasting
and Planning Inventory System (CEFIS).
South Coast 2007 AQMP, Appendix III,
page III–1–1. Both base year and
baseline inventories use the current
version of California’s mobile source
emissions model approved by EPA for
use in SIPs, EMFAC2007 V2.3, for
estimating on-road motor vehicle
emissions. 73 FR 3464 (January 18,
2008). Off-road inventories were
developed using the CARB off-road
model. Ammonia emissions estimates
were provided separately by the
District.12
3. Proposed Action on the Emission
Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions
inventories in the South Coast 2007
AQMP and the inventory methodologies
used by the District and CARB for
consistency with CAA requirements, the
PM2.5 implementation rule, and EPA’s
guidance. We find that the base year and
projected baseline year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventories of actual or projected
emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors
in the South Coast nonattainment area
12 Electronic mail from Kathy Hsiao, SCAQMD to
Wienke Tax, EPA Region 9, RE: NH3 numbers for
SCAB, dated October 29, 2010.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
as of the date of their submittal. We
therefore propose to approve these
inventories as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 172(c)(3), the PM2.5
implementation rule and applicable
EPA guidance. We provide more detail
on our review of the inventories in
section II.A. of the TSD for this
proposal.
C. Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM)/Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) and
Adopted Control Strategy
1. Requirements for RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that
each attainment plan ‘‘provide for the
implementation of all reasonably
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable (including
such reductions in emissions from
existing sources in the area as may be
obtained through the adoption, at a
minimum, of reasonably available
control technology), and shall provide
for attainment of the national primary
ambient air quality standards.’’ EPA
defines RACM as measures that a State
finds are both reasonably available and
contribute to attainment as
expeditiously as practicable in its
nonattainment area. Thus, what
constitutes RACM/RACT in a PM2.5
attainment plan is closely tied to that
plan’s expeditious attainment
demonstration. 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 FR
20586 at 20612. States are required to
evaluate RACM/RACT for direct PM2.5
and all of its attainment plan precursors.
40 CFR 51.1002(c).
For PM2.5 attainment plans, EPA is
requiring a combined approach to
RACM and RACT under subpart 1 of
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Part D of the CAA. Subpart 1, unlike
subparts 2 and 4, does not identify
specific source categories for which EPA
must issue control technology
documents or guidelines, or identify
specific source categories for State and
EPA evaluation during attainment plan
development. 72 FR 20586, at 20610.
Rather, under subpart 1, EPA considers
RACT to be part of an area’s overall
RACM obligation. Because of the
variable nature of the PM2.5 problem in
different nonattainment areas, which
may require States to develop
attainment plans that address widely
disparate circumstances, EPA
determined that states should have
flexibility with respect to RACT and
RACM controls but also that in areas
needing significant emission reductions
to attain the standards, RACT/RACM
controls on smaller sources may be
necessary to reach attainment as
expeditiously as practicable. 72 FR
20586, at 20612, 20615. Thus, under the
PM2.5 implementation rule, RACT and
RACM are those reasonably available
measures that contribute to attainment
as expeditiously as practicable in the
specific nonattainment area. 40 CFR
51.1010; 72 FR 20586, at 20612.
Specifically, the PM2.5 implementation
rule requires that attainment plans
include the list of measures the state
considered and information sufficient to
show that a state met all requirements
for the determination of what
constitutes RACM/RACT in the specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010(a).
In addition, the rule requires that the
state, in determining whether a
particular emissions reduction measure
or set of measures must be adopted as
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
RACM/RACT, consider the cumulative
impact of implementing the available
measures and adopt as RACM/RACT
any potential measures that are
reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility
if, considered collectively, they would
advance the attainment date by one year
or more. Any measures that are
necessary to meet these requirements
that are not already either federally
promulgated, part of the state’s SIP, or
otherwise creditable in SIPs must be
submitted in enforceable form as part of
a state’s attainment plan for the area. 72
FR 20586, at 20614.
A more comprehensive discussion of
the RACM/RACT requirement for PM2.5
attainment plans and EPA’s guidance
for it can be found in the PM2.5
implementation rule preamble at
20609–20633 and in section II.D. of the
TSD for this proposal.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the
SIP
CARB and the District have
rulemaking processes for development,
adoption and implementation of RACM/
RACT that have been in place for
decades. Many of the measures being
implemented in California and the
South Coast nonattainment area are the
most stringent in the nation and are
often adopted for implementation in
other areas. In addition, the State and
District have adopted new measures
since 2002, the base year for the South
Coast 2007 AQMP, and included
enforceable commitments for measures
that are scheduled to be adopted in the
future. The RACM/RACT analysis for
the South Coast 2007 AQMP includes
an evaluation of the State’s, District’s,
and the Southern California Association
of Governments’ (SCAG’s) new
stationary, area and mobile sources
measures that have been adopted since
the base year and those that are being
committed to for adoption in the future.
See CARB Staff Report, ‘‘Proposed 2007
State Implementation Plan for the South
Coast Air Basin—PM2.5 Annual Average
and 8–Hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards’’ (September 21,
2007); South Coast 2007 AQMP,
Appendix VI; and 2007 State Strategy,
Appendix G. A more detailed
discussion of the District, State and
SCAG measures is provided below.
a. District’s RACM/RACT Analysis and
Adopted Control Strategy
The District’s RACM/RACT analysis,
which focuses on stationary and area
source controls, is described in Chapter
6 and Appendix VI of the South Coast
2007 AQMP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
Since the 1970s, the District has
adopted stationary source control rules
that have resulted in significant
improvement of air quality in the South
Coast nonattainment area. When
command and control rules were no
longer within the limitations of
economic efficiency, the District began
using economic incentive approaches
with programs such as the Regional
Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM)
and the Carl Moyer program.13 While
the District still relies on command and
control regulations, the District’s control
strategies are now supplemented by
market incentive and compliance
flexibility approaches where
appropriate. These regulations and
strategies have yielded significant
emissions reductions from sources
under the District’s jurisdiction. In
developing the South Coast 2007
AQMP, the District conducted a process
to identify RACM for the South Coast
that involved public meetings to solicit
input, evaluation of EPA suggested
RACM and RACT, and evaluation of
other air agencies’ regulations. See
South Coast 2007 AQMP, Appendix VI.
To determine which measures would
be feasible for the South Coast, the
District looked at measures
implemented in other nonattainment
areas’ plans (including the San Joaquin
Valley, the San Francisco Bay Area,
Sacramento, Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth,
the Houston-Galveston area, and by the
Lake Michigan Air Directors
Consortium, or LADCO), and held
meetings with CARB, technical experts,
local government representatives, and
the public during development of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP. The District
sponsored an AQMP summit, which
generated 200 potential control
measures. In addition, the District
reviewed the list of control measures in
EPA’s PM2.5 implementation rule. The
District also reevaluated all 82 District
rules and regulations. The District then
screened the identified measures and
rejected those that affected few or no
sources in the South Coast, had already
been adopted as rules, or were in the
process of being adopted. The remaining
measures were evaluated using baseline
inventories, available control
technologies, and potential emission
13 The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality
Standards Attainment Program (‘‘Carl Moyer
Program’’) provides incentive grants for engines,
equipment and other sources of pollution that are
cleaner than required, providing early or extra
emission reductions. Eligible projects include
cleaner on-road, off-road, marine, locomotive and
stationary agricultural pump engines. The program
achieves near-term reductions in emissions of NOX,
PM, and VOC or reactive organic gas (ROG) which
are necessary for California to meet its clean air
commitments under the SIP.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71299
reductions as well as whether the
measure could be implemented on a
schedule that would contribute to
attainment of the PM2.5 standard
assuming a 2015 deadline. South Coast
2007 AQMP, Appendix VI.
In general, EPA believes that the
District’s current rules and regulations
are equivalent to or more stringent with
respect to emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5
precursors than those developed by
other air districts, with a few exceptions
where improvements are possible. The
District is exploring several options for
reducing emissions further. These
include the feasibility of lowering
emission limits and increasing levels of
control in order to promote cleaner
stationary source technologies; lowering
the VOC content of coatings and
solvents; establishing standards and test
methods for generic equipment and
lowering release or leak thresholds;
improving leak detection, repair,
inspection and maintenance; and
adding best management practices to
rules.
Based on its RACM/RACT evaluation
for stationary and area sources under its
jurisdiction, the District developed 37
stationary source control measures that
contained all measures included in
other districts’ AQMPs, as well as some
new innovative measures. The District
determined that the few available
measures that District staff did not
include would not advance the
attainment date or contribute to RFP
due to the insignificant or
unquantifiable emissions reductions
they would potentially generate. Since
submittal of the AQMP in 2007, the
District has completed action on the
majority of these rules and submitted
them to EPA for approval into the SIP.
From October 2002 through June
2006, the District adopted
approximately 17 rules to address its
commitment to achieve the reductions
committed to in the 2003 AQMP for the
South Coast. These rules included
controls on VOC emissions from
refineries and chemical plants, cocomposting operations, architectural
coatings, solvent cleaning operations,
oil and gas production wells, and
livestock waste. Many of the adopted
rules achieved more estimated
reductions in VOC, NOX and SOX than
were expected in the 2003 AQMP. A
summary of these rules, which are
included in the baseline emissions
estimates for the South Coast 2007
AQMP, is provided in Table 1–2 of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP. See South
Coast 2007 AQMP, Chapter 1, Table 1–
2 and Chapter 4, page 4–6, and Table B–
1 in Appendix B of the TSD for today’s
action.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71300
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
In addition to the rules adopted for
2003 AQMP, the District has also made
new commitments in its South Coast
2007 AQMP to achieve further
reductions from VOC, NOX, SOX and
direct PM2.5 sources in the South Coast
Area. The District committed to adopt
and submit measures that will achieve
the following additional emissions
reductions: 32 tpd NOX, 10 tpd VOC, 4
tpd direct PM2.5 and 3 tpd SOX.14 See
CARB Staff Report on the South Coast
2007 AQMP, page ES–2 to ES–4. The
District expects to meet its emissions
reductions commitments for each of the
pollutants by adopting new control
measures and programs found in the
Table 4–2A of the South Coast 2007
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
14 CARB uses the term ROG (reactive organic
gases) where we use the term VOC. We will use the
term ‘‘VOC’’ in this notice to refer to both ROG and
VOC.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
AQMP (See South Coast 2007 AQMP,
page 4–10 and CARB Staff Report on
South Coast 2007 AQMP, p. 18) and
from additional actions summarized in
the CARB Staff Report on the South
Coast 2007 AQMP (See CARB Staff
Report on South Coast 2007 AQMP, p.
17). The new control measures and
additional actions are estimated to
achieve more of the District’s NOX and
VOC emission reduction commitments.
They include new rules to regulate
lubricants, consumer products, nonRECLAIM ovens, dryers and furnaces,
space heaters, facility modernizations,
livestock waste, residential wood
burning, commercial cooking, and
continuation of the Carl Moyer program.
The South Coast 2007 AQMP also
identifies 22 measures (beyond the new
control measures and additional actions
just discussed) for further review which
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
may also yield additional reductions
towards the District’s commitments. As
discussed above, the District’s
commitment is to achieve the estimated
total tonnage reductions of each
pollutant because specific control
measures and actions as adopted may
provide more or less reductions than
estimated in the South Coast 2007
AQMP.
Finally, EPA notes that since the
adoption of the South Coast 2007
AQMP, the District has already adopted
and submitted several new rules that
help fulfill the District’s enforceable
commitments for additional emission
reductions of NOX, VOC, direct PM2.5
and SOX in the South Coast area. Tables
2 and 3 below summarize the status of
these new rules.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
71301
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
SIP-approved ..................................
SIP-approved ..................................
Not yet submitted—adopted 07/09/
10.
Rule 1145—Plastic, Rubber, Leather and Glass Coatings ......................
Rule 1147—NOX reductions from miscellaneous sources ......................
Rule 2002—Further SOX reductions from RECLAIM ..............................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Rule 445—Woodburning fireplaces and wood stoves .............................
Rule 1144—Vanishing oils and rust inhibitors .........................................
Rule 1143—Consumer Paint Thinners and Multi-Purpose Solvents .......
SIP-approved ..................................
SIP-approved ..................................
Not yet adopted ..............................
Rule 1111—Further NOX reductions from space heaters .......................
Rule 1110.2—Liquid and gaseous fuels—stationary ICEs ......................
Rule 1146—NOX from industrial, institutional, commercial boilers,
steam generators, and process heaters.
Rule 1146.1—NOX from small industrial, institutional, commercial boilers, steam generators, and process heaters.
Rule 1127—Livestock Waste ...................................................................
Refinery Pilot Program .............................................................................
SIP-approved ..................................
SIP-approved ..................................
Submitted .......................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Submitted .......................................
Submitted to EPA on 10/05/06 ......
Not yet adopted ..............................
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
74 FR 27716, 6/11/09.
75 FR 40726, 07/14/10.
New rule; no previous version
approved into the SIP; District
is revising rule.
75 FR 40726, 07/14/10.
75 FR 46845, 08/04/10.
Most recent approval 08/29/06,
71 FR 51120.
75 FR 46845, 08/04/10.
74 FR 18995, 4/27/09.
Most recent approval—04/08/02,
67 FR 16640.
Most recent approval—09/06/95,
60 FR 46220.
Found complete on 10/25/06.
N/A.
22NOP3
EP22NO10.021</GPH>
TABLE 3—SUBMITTAL AND APPROVAL STATUS OF DISTRICT RULES IN THE 2007 PM2.5 PLAN
71302
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—SUBMITTAL AND APPROVAL STATUS OF DISTRICT RULES IN THE 2007 PM2.5 PLAN—Continued
Rule 2301—Indirect Source Review ........................................................
Carl Moyer program ..................................................................................
AB923 Light duty vehicle high emitter program .......................................
AB923 Light duty vehicle high emitter program .......................................
b. CARB’s RACM Analysis and Adopted
Control Strategy
Source categories for which CARB has
primary responsibility for reducing
emissions in California include most
new and existing on- and off-road
engines and vehicles, motor vehicle
fuels, and consumer products. In
addition, California has unique
authority under CAA section 209
(subject to a waiver by EPA) to adopt
and implement new emission standards
for many categories of on-road vehicles
and engines, and new and in-use offroad vehicles and engines.
Given the need for significant
emissions reductions from mobile and
area sources to meet the NAAQS in
California nonattainment areas, the
State of California has been a leader in
the development of some of the most
stringent control measures nationwide
for on-road and off-road mobile sources
and the fuels that power them. These
standards have reduced new car
emissions by 99 percent and new truck
emissions by 90 percent from
uncontrolled levels. 2007 State Strategy,
p. 37. The State is also working with
Not yet adopted ..............................
No rule associated with this measure.
No rule associated with this measure.
No rule associated with this measure.
EPA on goods movement activities and
is implementing programs to reduce
emissions from ship auxiliary engines,
locomotives, harbor craft and new cargo
handling equipment. In addition, the
State has standards for lawn and garden
equipment, recreational vehicles and
boats, and other off-road sources that
require newly manufactured equipment
to be 80–98% cleaner than their
uncontrolled counterparts. Id. Finally,
the State has adopted many measures
that focus on achieving reductions from
in-use mobile sources that include more
stringent inspection and maintenance
(I/M) or ‘‘Smog Check’’ requirements,
truck and bus idling restrictions, and
various incentive programs. Since 1994
alone, the State has taken more than 45
rulemaking actions and achieved most
of the emissions reductions needed for
attainment in the State’s nonattainment
areas. See 2007 State Strategy, pp.
36–40. As is noted in the 2007 State
Strategy, EPA has approved California’s
mobile source program as representing
best available control measures. See
2007 State Strategy, Appendix G, 69 FR
5412 (February 4, 2004), 69 FR 30006
(May 26, 2004) (proposed and final
N/A.
Ongoing.
N/A.
N/A.
approval of San Joaquin Valley PM10
plan).
CARB developed its proposed 2007
State Strategy after an extensive public
consultation process to identify
potential SIP measures.15 From this
process, CARB identified and
committed to propose 15 new defined
measures. These measures focus on
cleaning up the in-use fleet as well as
increasing the stringency of emissions
standards for a number of engine
categories, fuels, and consumer
products. Many, if not most, of these
measures are being proposed for
adoption for the first time anywhere in
the nation. They build on CARB’s
already comprehensive program
described above that addresses
emissions from all types of mobile
sources and consumer products,
through both regulations and incentive
programs. See Appendix A of the TSD.
Table 4 below lists the new defined
measures in the 2007 State Strategy that
include one measure each from the
California Bureau of Automotive Repair
and the California Department of
Pesticide Regulation.
TABLE 4—2007 STATE STRATEGY DEFINED MEASURES SCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION AND CURRENT STATUS
Primary area (SC
and/or SJV)
Adoption year
Current status
Smog Check Improvements ...............................
Both ..............................
2007–2008 ...................
Expanded Vehicle Retirement ............................
Both ..............................
2008–2014 ...................
Revisions to Reformulated Gasoline Program ...
Both ..............................
2007 .............................
Cleaner In-use Heavy Duty Trucks ....................
Auxiliary Ship Cold Ironing and Other Clean
Technologies.
Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuels ...............
Both ..............................
SC ................................
2008 .............................
2007–2008 ...................
Elements approved 75 FR 38023 (July 1,
2010).
Adopted CARB June 2009; Bureau of
Automotive Repair September 2010.
Approved, See 75 FR 26653 (May 2,
2010).
Adopted 2008, pending revisions.
Adopted December 2007.
SC ................................
Port Truck Modernization ....................................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Defined state measure
SC ................................
Fuel: 2007, Engines:
2009.
2007–2008 ...................
Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Locomotives.
Clean Up Existing Harbor Crafts ........................
Both ..............................
2007–2008 ...................
SC ................................
2007 .............................
Both ..............................
SJV ...............................
Both ..............................
2007 .............................
2009 .............................
2009–2010 ...................
Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Engines ......................
Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment ..............
New Emissions Standards for Recreational
Boats.
15 More information on this public process
including presentations from the workshops and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
symposium that proceeded the adoption of the 2007
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Adopted July 2007.
Adopted December 2007 and December
2008.
In progress.
Adopted November 2007, revised June
2010.
Adopted 2007, pending revisions.
In progress using incentive funds.
Partial adoption, 2008; additional regulation in public review.
State Strategy can be found at https://
www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71303
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—2007 STATE STRATEGY DEFINED MEASURES SCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION AND CURRENT STATUS—
Continued
Defined state measure
Primary area (SC
and/or SJV)
Adoption year
Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Emissions Standards.
Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground
Storage Tanks.
Additional Evaporative Emissions Standards .....
Consumer Products Program (I & II) ..................
Both ..............................
By 2010 ........................
Adopted November 2008.
Both ..............................
2007 .............................
Adopted June 2007.
Both ..............................
Both ..............................
By 2010 ........................
2008 & 2010–2012 ......
Department of Pesticide Regulation ...................
SJV ...............................
2008 .............................
Partial adoption, 2008.
Phase I—Approved 74 FR 57074 (November 4, 2009).
Adopted 2008, amended 2009.
Current status
SC = South Coast nonattainment area; SJV = San Joaquin Valley. Source: 2009 State Strategy Status Report, p. 23 (footnotes in original not
included).
Appendix A of the TSD includes a list
of all measures adopted by CARB
between 1990 and the beginning of
2007. These measures, reductions from
which are reflected in the South Coast
2007 AQMP’s baseline inventories, fall
into two categories: Measures that are
subject to a waiver of Federal
preemption under CAA section 209
(‘‘section 209 waiver measures’’ or
‘‘waiver measures’’) and those for which
the State is not required to obtain a
waiver (‘‘non-waiver measures’’).
Emissions reductions from waiver
measures are fully creditable in
attainment and RFP demonstrations and
may be used to meet other CAA
requirements, such as contingency
measures. See EPA’s proposed approval
of the San Joaquin Valley 1-hour ozone
plan at 74 FR 33933, 33938 (July 14,
2009) and final approval at 75 FR 10420
(March 8, 2010). The State’s baseline
non-waiver measures have generally all
been approved by EPA into the SIP and
as such are fully creditable for meeting
CAA requirements.
In addition to the State’s
commitments to propose defined new
measures, the 2007 State Strategy
includes enforceable commitments for
direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and SOX
emissions reductions from mobile
source categories that are that are
crucial for attainment of the PM2.5
NAAQS in the South Coast
nonattainment area. For the South Coast
nonattainment area, the revised 2007
State Strategy includes State
commitments to achieve 152 tpd of
NOX, 46 tpd of VOC, 9 tpd of direct
PM2.5, and 20 tpd of SOX (See 2007 State
Strategy, p. 63 and CARB Resolution
07–28, Attachment B, p. 6). The 2007
State Strategy indicates that the State
expects to achieve these emission
reductions in the South Coast
nonattainment area by the projected
attainment year of 2014 from the
measures listed in Table 4 or other
similar measures. In the 2007 State
Strategy, CARB provides an estimated
emissions reduction for each measure to
show that, when considered together,
these measures can meet the total
commitment. CARB states, however,
that its enforceable commitment is to
achieve the aggregate emissions
reductions for each pollutant by the
given dates and not for a specific level
of reductions from any specific measure.
See 2007 State Strategy, p. 58. A
summary of the estimates from the
proposed measures is provided in Table
5 below.
As mentioned above, CARB’s
commitment is also to propose specific
new measures that are identified and
defined in the 2007 Strategy State. See
2007 State Strategy, pp. 64–65 and 2009
State Strategy revisions, pp. 22–23.
Table 5 below lists these defined
measures. As shown in this table, the
State has adopted many of the measures.
TABLE 5—EXPECTED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM DEFINED MEASURES IN THE 2007 STATE STRATEGY FOR THE SOUTH
COAST (2014 TONS PER DAY)
Measure
2014 NOX
2014 VOC
2014 Direct
PM2.5
2014 SOX
Smog Check Improvements (BAR) [partial] ....................................................
Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program ...........................................
Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks .................................................................
Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology ................................
Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel [fuel portion only] .................................
Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft .......................................................................
Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (> 25hp) ................................................
Consumer Products Program [partial] .............................................................
2.0
........................
59.7
25.4
1.3
2.4
10.5
........................
4.1
4.4
5.0
0.1
........................
0.1
2.7
1.8
........................
........................
3.5
0.5
1.9
0.1
2.6
........................
........................
........................
........................
0.3
17.0
........................
........................
........................
Totals ...............................................................................................................
101.3
18.2
8.6
17.3
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Source: 2009 CARB Staff Report on the State Strategy, p. 5. Only defined measures with reductions in the South Coast nonattainment area
are shown here.
c. The Local Jurisdiction’s RACM
Analysis
The local jurisdiction’s RACM
analysis was conducted by the
metropolitan planning organization
(MPO) for the South Coast region, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG). This analysis,
which focused on transportation control
measures (TCMs), and its results are
described in Appendix IV–C of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP. The TCMs in
the South Coast 2007 AQMP are derived
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
from TCM projects in the 2006 SCAG
Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP). This evaluation,
described beginning on page 49 of
Appendix IV–C of the South Coast 2007
AQMP, resulted in extensive local
government commitments to implement
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71304
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
programs to reduce auto travel and
improve traffic flow. South Coast 2007
AQMP page 6–6 and Appendix IV–C.
SCAG also provided reasoned
justifications for any measures that it
did not adopt. Attachment A to
Appendix IV–C contains an extensive
list of TCMs in process and newly
programmed TCMs. The enforceable
commitment from SCAG and the
transportation agencies was to fund and
implement projects in the first two years
of the 2006 Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP).
3. Proposed Actions on RACM/RACT
and Adopted Control Strategy
Under the PM2.5 implementation rule,
RACM/RACT are the set of measures
necessary for expeditious attainment.
The measures must address emissions of
PM2.5 and all PM2.5 attainment plan
precursors that are necessary to result in
such expeditious attainment. In order
for a PM2.5 plan to demonstrate that it
provides for RACM/RACT, it must also
demonstrate that it provides for
expeditious attainment. 72 FR 20586, p.
20612–20623. As discussed further
below in section D.5., we are proposing
to disapprove the PM2.5 attainment
demonstration for the South Coast
nonattainment area because it relies too
heavily on commitments to reduce
emissions in lieu of fully adopted
measures. Absent an approvable
attainment demonstration, we are
unable to propose to approve and must
instead propose to disapprove the
AQMP’s RACM/RACT demonstration. It
appears, however, that the District, State
and local jurisdictions have identified
and otherwise provided for the
implementation of a comprehensive set
of measures that are among the most
stringent in the nation and, should the
State correct the deficiencies in the
attainment demonstration, we expect to
be able to propose to approve the plan’s
RACM/RACT demonstration.
Because they will strengthen the
California SIP, we are proposing to
approve the District’s commitments to
the adoption and implementation
schedule for specific control measures
given in Table 7–3 in the South Coast
2007 AQMP, to the extent that these
commitments have not yet been
fulfilled, and to achieve specific
aggregate emissions reductions of direct
PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and SOX by specific
years as given in Table 4–10 of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP.
We are also proposing to approve, as
a SIP strengthening measure, CARB’s
commitments to propose certain defined
measures, as given on page 23 of the
2009 State Strategy Status Report, to
achieve aggregate emissions reductions
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
of 152 tpd NOX, 46 tpd VOC, 9 tpd
PM2.5, and 20 tpd SOX in the South
Coast by 2014.
D. Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for Attainment
Demonstrations
CAA section 172 requires a State to
submit a plan for each of its
nonattainment areas that demonstrates
attainment of the applicable ambient air
quality standard as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the
specified attainment date. Under the
PM2.5 implementation rule, this
demonstration should consist of four
parts:
(1) Technical analyses that locate,
identify, and quantify sources of
emissions that are contributing to
violations of the PM2.5 NAAQS;
(2) analyses of future year emissions
reductions and air quality improvement
resulting from already-adopted national,
State, and local programs and from
potential new State and local measures
to meet the RACT, RACM, and RFP
requirements in the area;
(3) adopted emissions reduction
measures with schedules for
implementation; and
(4) contingency measures required
under section 172(c)(9) of the CAA.
See 40 CFR 51.1007; 72 FR 20586, at
20605.
The requirements for the first two
parts are described in the sections on
emissions inventories and RACM/RACT
above and in the sections on air quality
modeling, PM2.5 precursors, extension
of attainment date, and attainment
demonstrations that follow immediately
below. Requirements for the third and
fourth parts are described in the
sections on the control strategy and the
contingency measures, respectively.
2. Air Quality Modeling in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP
The procedures for modeling
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS as part
of an attainment SIP are contained in
EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on the Use of Models
and Other Analyses for Demonstrating
Attainment of Air Quality Goals for the
8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and
Regional Haze.’’ 16 A brief description of
the modeling used to support South
Coast’s attainment demonstration
follows. For more detailed information
about the modeling, please refer to the
TSD associated with this rulemaking,
which can be found in the docket for
today’s action.
16 The guidance is available at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance_sip.htm and in
the docket for today’s action.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Air quality modeling is used to
establish emission attainment targets, a
combination of emissions of PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors that the nonattainment
area can accommodate without
exceeding the NAAQS, and to assess
whether the proposed control strategy
will result in attainment of the NAAQS
by the applicable attainment date. Air
quality modeling is performed for a base
year and compared to air quality
monitoring data to determine model
performance. Once the performance is
determined to be acceptable, future year
emission inventory changes are
simulated to determine the relationship
between emission reductions and
changes in ambient air quality
throughout the nonattainment area.
The attainment demonstration for the
South Coast nonattainment area is based
on the CAMx model using the ‘‘one
atmosphere’’ approach comprised of the
carbon bond IV (CB–IV) gas phased
chemistry and a static two-mode
particle size aerosol.17 CAMx annual
average PM2.5 modeling simulations
were generated for 2005 and 2014
baseline emissions scenarios and for a
2014 controlled emissions scenario by
the District. District staff compared the
base year model output to speciated
particulate data measured in 2005 as
part of the Multiple Air Toxics III
(MATES–III) program. Model
specifications, such as boundary
conditions, domain size, and resolution,
meet EPA criteria and are discussed in
the TSD. Model performance for total
mass (the sum of specific individual
species), as well as specific individual
species, is adequate and is discussed in
the TSD.
The District’s attainment analysis
follows EPA’s guideline technique of
applying component-specific relative
response factors (RRF) to monitored
data throughout the South Coast
nonattainment area. A RRF is the ratio
of the model’s future to current
(baseline) predictions at a monitor.
Future PM2.5 concentrations are
estimated at existing monitoring sites by
multiplying a modeled RRF at the grid
cell locations of each monitor by the
observation-based, monitor-specific,
‘‘baseline’’ design value. A separate RRF
is calculated for each of the PM2.5
precursors. Future PM2.5 design values
were estimated by District staff at
existing monitoring sites throughout the
South Coast nonattainment area by
multiplying modeled RRFs for each
17 CAMx is the Comprehensive Air Quality Model
with extensions, an Eulerian photochemical
dispersion model that allows for integrated ‘‘oneatmosphere’’ assessments of gaseous and particulate
air pollution (ozone, PM2.5, PM10, air toxics) over
many scales ranging from sub-urban to continental.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
monitor times the observed
‘‘component-specific design value’’. The
future PM2.5 design values were then
compared to the annual and 24-hour
NAAQS to demonstrate attainment at
each site. The maximum 2014 predicted
24-hour PM2.5 design value at any site
is 56.6 μg/m3; this is lower than the 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS at 65 μg/m3. The
maximum 2014 predicted PM2.5 annual
design value is 15.0 μg/m3; a predicted
design value of 15.04 μg/m3 or lower is
considered modeled attainment of the
annual standard.
EPA guidance also recommends the
use of supplemental data analyses to
support the air quality modeling. The
District used air quality trends and
emission inventory trends as ‘‘weight of
evidence’’ to support the air quality
modeling for the attainment
demonstration.
The District used its air quality
modeling to establish emissions
reduction targets to be used in
developing the control strategy for the
nonattainment SIP. Once a proposed
control strategy was developed, the
District then used the photochemical
modeling to verify that the projected
emissions reductions would result in
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards
throughout the South Coast
nonattainment area by the target
attainment date of 2014. The estimated
carrying capacities for the South Coast
nonattainment area are included in
Table 7.18 19
We are proposing to approve the air
quality modeling demonstration in the
South Coast 2007 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of the CAA and EPA
guidance. We provide further discussion
in the TSD.
TABLE 6—EMISSIONS CARRYING CAPACITY ESTIMATES FOR THE SOUTH
COAST NONATTAINMENT AREA FOR
PM2.5 ATTAINMENT
[Tons/day, based on planning inventory]
NOX
SOX
VOC
87
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
PM2.5
454
19
469
18 ‘‘Carrying capacity’’ is defined as the maximum
level of emissions that enable the attainment and
maintenance of an ambient air quality standard for
a pollutant. (See South Coast 2007 AQMP, page 5–
27.)
19 The CARB Staff Report for the South Coast
2007 AQMP presents a slightly different emissions
carrying capacity which relies more heavily on
reductions of primary PM2.5 and less heavily on
reductions of precursors to PM2.5. The Staff Report’s
emission carrying capacity estimates are PM2.5—86
tons/day, NOX—460 tons/day, SOX—20 tons/day,
and VOC—474 tons/day (See CARB Staff Report on
the South Coast AQMP, page ES–3).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
3. PM2.5 Precursors Addressed in the
South Coast 2007 AQMP
EPA recognizes NOX, SO2, VOCs, and
ammonia as the main precursor gases
associated with the formation of
secondary PM2.5 in the ambient air.
These gas-phase PM2.5 precursors
undergo chemical reactions in the
atmosphere to form secondary
particulate matter. Formation of
secondary PM2.5 depends on numerous
factors including the concentrations of
precursors; the concentrations of other
gaseous reactive species; atmospheric
conditions including solar radiation,
temperature, and relative humidity; and
the interactions of precursors with
preexisting particles and with cloud or
fog droplets. 72 FR 20586, at 20589.
As discussed previously, a state must
submit emissions inventories for each of
the four PM2.5 precursor pollutants. 72
FR 20586, at 20589 and 40 CFR
§ 51.1008(a)(1). However, the overall
contribution of different precursors to
PM2.5 formation and the effectiveness of
alternative potential control measures
will vary by area. Thus, the precursors
that a state should regulate to attain the
PM2.5 NAAQS could also vary to some
extent from area to area. 72 FR 20586,
at 20589.
In the PM2.5 implementation rule,
EPA did not make a finding that all
potential PM2.5 precursors must be
controlled in each specific
nonattainment area. See 72 FR 20586, at
20589. Instead, for the reasons
explained in the rule, a state must
evaluate control measures for sources of
SO2 in addition to sources of direct
PM2.5 in all nonattainment areas. 40 CFR
§ 51.1002(c) and (c)(1). A state must also
evaluate control measures for sources of
NOX unless the State and/or EPA
determine that control of NOX emissions
would not significantly reduce PM2.5
concentrations in the specific
nonattainment area. Id. at 40 CFR
51.1002(c)(2). EPA has determined in
the PM2.5 implementation rule that
states do not need to address VOC and
ammonia in an area unless the state
and/or EPA determine that controls on
such sources would significantly
contribute to reducing PM2.5
concentrations in the nonattainment
area. Id. at 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(3) and (4).
‘‘Significantly contributes’’ in this
context means that a significant
reduction in emissions of the precursor
from sources in the area would be
projected to provide a significant
reduction in PM2.5 concentrations in the
area. 72 FR 20586, at 20590.
In the South Coast nonattainment
area, PM2.5 can be directly emitted, such
as from road dust, diesel soot,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71305
combustion products, and other sources
(‘‘primary particles’’), or formed through
atmospheric chemical reactions of
precursor chemicals (‘‘secondary
particles’’). Examples of secondary
particles include sulfates, nitrates, and
complex carbon compounds formed
from reactions of NOX, SOX, VOCs, and
ammonia. The attainment
demonstration for the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area addresses
ammonium nitrate and ammonium
sulfate because they represent a
dominant fraction of PM2.5 components
in this area and are formed through
secondary reactions of the precursors
NOX, SOX, VOC and ammonia. The
District’s analysis indicates that SOX
reductions followed by directly-emitted
PM2.5 and NOX reductions provide the
greatest ambient PM2.5 reductions. VOC
reductions can also contribute to
improving ambient PM2.5 concentrations
and will occur concurrently as a result
of District’s 8-hour ozone strategy.20
Starting in 2011, the PM2.5
implementation rule requires that states
must also address condensable
particulate matter (CPM), including
estimates of CPM in emissions
inventories, modeling, and control
strategies.
4. Extension of the Attainment Date
CAA section 172(a)(2) provides that
an area’s attainment date ‘‘shall be the
date by which attainment can be
achieved as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 5 years
from the date such area was designated
nonattainment * * *, except that the
Administrator may extend the
attainment date to the extent the
Administrator determines appropriate,
for a period no greater than 10 years
from the date of designation as
nonattainment considering the severity
of nonattainment and the availability
and feasibility of pollution control
measures.’’
Because the effective date of
designations for the 1997 PM2.5
standards was April 5, 2005 (70 FR 944),
the initial attainment date for PM2.5
nonattainment areas is as expeditiously
as practicable but not later than April 5,
2010. For any areas that are granted a
full five-year attainment date extension
under section 172, the attainment date
would be no later than April 5, 2015.
Section 51.1004 of the PM2.5
implementation rule addresses the
attainment date requirement. Section
51.1004(b) requires a State to submit an
20 See page 5–17 of Chapter 5 of the South Coast
2007 AQMP. We approved the South Coast RACT
SIP on December 18, 2008 (See 73 FR 76947) as
complying with the relevant CAA requirements for
RACT SIPs for 8-hour ozone.
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
71306
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
attainment demonstration justifying its
proposed attainment date and provides
that EPA will approve an attainment
date when we approve that
demonstration. Thus, the selection of
the attainment date is dependent upon
a demonstration showing expeditious
attainment, and likewise dependent
upon proper evaluation of what
constitutes RACM/RACT level controls
in the area.
States that request an extension of the
attainment date under CAA section
172(a)(2) must provide sufficient
information to show that attainment by
April 5, 2010 is impracticable due to the
severity of the nonattainment problem
in the area and the lack of available and
feasible control measures to provide for
faster attainment. 40 CFR 51.1004(b).
States must also demonstrate that all
RACM and RACT for the area are being
implemented to bring about attainment
of the standard by the most expeditious
alternative date practicable for the area.
72 FR 20586, at 20601. Thus, the proper
evaluation of RACM/RACT controls is
an integral part of justifying an
extension of the attainment date.
For urban areas nationwide, the South
Coast nonattainment area has the
second highest average annual mean
PM2.5 concentration (ranking only
behind the San Joaquin Valley in
California for the 1997 PM2.5 standards).
PM2.5 concentrations recorded over the
last few years at the Riverside and Mira
Loma monitoring sites continue to read
well above the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.21
The PM2.5 problem in the South Coast
is complex, caused by both direct PM2.5
and secondary PM2.5, and compounded
by the topographical and meteorological
conditions for the area that are very
conducive to the formation and
concentration of PM2.5 particles. South
Coast 2007 AQMP, Chapter 4.
As discussed in section IV.C.3. above,
the District’s strategy for attaining the
PM2.5 standard relies on reductions of
directly-emitted PM2.5 as well as the
PM2.5 precursor pollutants NOX, VOC,
and SOX. The South Coast
nonattainment area needs significant
reductions in PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and
SOX to demonstrate attainment. EPA
believes that further reduction of these
pollutants is challenging, because the
State and local air pollution regulations
already in place include most of the
readily available PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and
SOX control measures. Moreover,
attainment in the South Coast
nonattainment area must also mitigate
21 See
the emissions increases associated with
the projected increases in population
and emissions levels for this highgrowth area.
The direct PM2.5 reductions are
achieved primarily from open burning
and residential wood combustion
control measures. These types of control
measures present special
implementation challenges (e.g., the
large number of individuals subject to
regulation and the difficulty of applying
conventional technological control
solutions). NOX reductions come largely
from District rules for fuel combustion
sources, and from the State’s mobile
source rules. VOC reductions come from
District rules governing the petroleum
industry, as well as consumer products
rules at both the State and local level.
SOX reductions identified in the plan
come from District rules such as
RECLAIM, and State measures related to
ships.
Because of the necessity of obtaining
additional emissions reductions from
these source categories in the South
Coast nonattainment area and the need
to conduct significant public outreach if
applicable control approaches are to be
effective, EPA agrees with the District
and CARB that the South Coast 2007
AQMP reflects expeditious
implementation of the programs during
the 2008–2014 time frame. EPA also
agrees that the implementation schedule
for enhanced stationary source controls
is expeditious, taking into account the
time necessary for purchase and
installation of the required control
technologies. Finally, we believe that it
is not feasible at this time to accelerate
the emission reduction schedule for the
State and Federal mobile source
requirements, which set aggressive
compliance dates for new emission
standards and which must rely on fleet
turnover over the years to deliver the
ultimate emission reductions. The
District’s control strategies are discussed
in greater detail in Chapter 4 of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP, and in section
IV.C.2 above.
In addition, the State has adopted
standards for many categories of on-road
and off-road vehicles and engines, and
gasoline and diesel fuels, and included
commitments to develop rules for Smog
Check Improvements, Cleaner In-Use
Heavy-Duty Trucks, SIP Auxiliary
Engines Cold Ironing and Clean
Technology, Cleaner Main Ship Engines
and Fuel, Cleaner In-Use Off-Road
Equipment.
EPA believes that the District and
State are implementing these rules and
programs as expeditiously as
practicable. We anticipate that the
District will reevaluate this conclusion
after completion of the mid-course
review of the nonattainment SIP for this
area, due in April 2011. EPA also
expects that CARB and the District will
continue to investigate opportunities to
accelerate progress as new control
opportunities arise, and that the
agencies will promptly adopt and
expeditiously implement any new
measures found to be feasible in the
future.
As discussed in section IV.C.6 above,
however, we are not in a position at this
time to approve, and therefore are
proposing to disapprove, the RACM/
RACT demonstration in the South Coast
2007 AQMP because we cannot approve
the attainment demonstration. As stated
in the PM2.5 implementation rule, EPA
cannot grant an extension of the
attainment date beyond the initial five
years provided by section 172(a)(2)(A) if
the State has not adequately considered
and evaluated the implementation of
RACM and RACT for this area. (See 72
FR 20586, at 20601) Given the severity
of the PM2.5 nonattainment problem in
the South Coast nonattainment area and
the substantial progress the District has
made to adopt and implement reduction
strategies, an extension of the
attainment date would most likely be
appropriate and approvable if it were
supported by the necessary analysis and
a part of an attainment plan that meets
the applicable statutory and regulatory
requirements.
5. Attainment Demonstration
Table 7 below summarizes the
measures that are relied upon in the
South Coast 2007 AQMP’s PM2.5
attainment demonstration to achieve the
target emissions estimates shown in
Table 7. The District and State reduction
levels reflect an agreement between
CARB, the District, and SCAG which
provides for more NOX reductions than
were identified as necessary for
attainment in the South Coast 2007
AQMP. See CARB Staff Report for South
Coast 2007 AQMP, ES–1, ES–3;
November 28, 2007 letter to Wayne
Nastri, EPA Region 9 Regional
Administrator, Enclosure VI, CARB
Resolution 07–41, adopting the 2007
South Coast nonattainment area
revisions to the California SIP,
September 27, 2007.
footnote 3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71307
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF MEASURES NEEDED FOR SOUTH COAST’S PM2.5 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION
[tpd]
VOC
PM2.5
SOX
732
528
474
54
258
204
10
46
....................
....................
56
260
101
102
86
16
16
0
4
9
....................
....................
16
16
63
43
20
23
43
20
3
20
....................
....................
23
43
NOX
A. 2006 baseline (2007 State Strategy, p. 33) ................................................................
B. 2014 baseline (ARB Staff Report for South Coast 2007 AQMP) ...............................
C. 2014 Attainment target (ARB staff Report for South Coast 2007 AQMP) .................
D. Reductions needed from ‘‘new’’ measures (B minus C) ............................................
E. Total reductions needed by 2014 (A minus C) ...........................................................
F. Reductions from ‘‘baseline’’ (pre-2007 measures) (A minus B) .................................
G. New local/AQMD reductions .......................................................................................
H. New State reductions ..................................................................................................
I. Federal reductions ........................................................................................................
J. Additional local/AQMD reductions ...............................................................................
K. Total ‘‘new’’ reductions (G+H+I+J) ..............................................................................
L. Total reductions (F+K) .................................................................................................
972
654
460
194
512
318
28
152
10
4
194
512
Source: CARB staff report on the South Coast 2007 AQMP, 2009 State Strategy Status Report.
As shown in Table 7, the majority of
emissions reductions the State projects
are needed for PM2.5 attainment in the
South Coast nonattainment area by 2015
come from baseline reductions, i.e.,
from adopted measures that have
generally been approved by EPA either
through the SIP or the CAA section 209
waiver process. See Appendices A and
B of the TSD. The remaining reductions
needed for attainment are to be achieved
through the District’s and CARB’s
commitments to reduce emissions in the
South Coast and from a federal
assignment which EPA cannot approve,
as discussed below. Since the submittal
of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and
2007 State Strategy, the District and
CARB have already adopted measures
(summarized in Table 8 below) that can
be credited toward reducing their
aggregate emissions reduction in their
enforceable commitments. For the State,
adopted waiver measures 22 or EPAapproved measures since 2007 (Ship
Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean
Technology; Clean Up Existing Harbor
Craft; Modifications to Reformulated
Gasoline Program—Phase 3; Consumer
Products Program I) reduced emissions
by 27.8 tpd of NOX, 6.4 tpd of VOC, 0.6
tpd of PM 2.5 and 0.3 of SOX (See Table
8 for a summary of these reductions).
Emissions reductions from District
measures approved by EPA since 2007
include 14.5 tpd of NOX, 4.3 tpd of
VOC, and 1.2 tpd of PM2.5.
TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF ENFORCEABLE COMMITMENTS IN THE SOUTH COAST 2007 AQMP FOR PM2.5 ATTAINMENT IN
2014
2014 NOX
State Strategy Commitment (tpd) ............................................................................................
Less Reductions from Adopted Waiver Measures or EPA-approved measures Since 2007
(Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology; Clean Up Existing Harbor
Craft; Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program—Phase 3; Consumer Products
Program I) a.
Remaining State Commitment .................................................................................................
District Commitment .................................................................................................................
Less reductions from EPA approved District measures since 2007 .......................................
Remaining District Commitment ..............................................................................................
Missing 3 tpd PM2.5 (See footnote 23) ....................................................................................
Total remaining commitment (tpd) b .........................................................................................
Total remaining commitment (%) (compared to Line E of Table 7 above) .............................
2014 VOC
2014 PM2.5
2014 SOX
152 ...........
27.8 tpd ...
46 ............
6.4 tpd .....
9 23
...........
0.6 tpd .....
20.
0.3 tpd.
124.2 .......
32 .............
14.5 .........
17.5 .........
..................
151.7 .......
30% .........
39.6 .........
10 ............
4.3 ...........
5.7 ...........
..................
45.3 ..........
18% .........
8.4 ...........
4 ..............
1.2 ...........
2.8 ...........
3 ...............
14.2 ..........
89% c .......
19.7.
3.
0.
3.
22.7.
53%.
a Reductions from other adopted measures listed in the revised 2007 State Strategy on p. 5 (South Coast 2014) are not creditable in reducing
the enforceable commitment because they have either not been submitted to EPA or approved (or proposed for approval) into the SIP. These
measures include the Smog Check Improvements (to be adopted by the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR)), Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty
Trucks, Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment, and Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel. See 2009 State Strategy revisions, p. 5.
b Includes federal assignment of 10 tpd NO .
X
c See footnote 23. This percentage assumes that total direct PM
2.5 reductions needed for attainment is 16 tpd, as indicated in Table 7.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
a. Enforceable Commitments
As stated and shown above, measures
already adopted by the District and
CARB (both prior to and pursuant to the
South Coast 2007 AQMP and revised
2007 State Strategy) provide the
22 EPA allows emission reduction credit for
measures that are subject to the CAA section 209
process. See EPA’s proposed approval of the San
Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Plan at 74 FR 33933,
33938 (July 14, 2009). The State’s baseline non-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
majority of emission reductions needed
to demonstrate attainment in the
nonattainment SIP as designed for this
area. The balance of the needed
reductions is in the form of enforceable
commitments by CARB. This approach
is consistent with past practice because
the CAA allows approval of enforceable
commitments that are limited in scope
where circumstances exist that warrant
the use of such commitments in place
waiver measures have generally all been approved
by EPA into the SIP. See TSD, Appendix A.
23 The 2007 State Strategy identifies 9 tpd of
directly-emitted PM2.5 as the aggregate State
commitment by the 2015 attainment date (See 2009
State Strategy Status Report, page 20) but the CARB
staff report for the South Coast 2007 AQMP
indicates a 12 tpd commitment. (See 2007 staff
report, page ES–3) It is unclear whether the State’s
commitment is for 9 tpd PM2.5 or 12 tpd of direct
PM2.5.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71308
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
of adopted measures.24 Once EPA
determines that circumstances warrant
consideration of an enforceable
commitment, EPA considers three
factors in determining whether to
approve the CAA requirement that relies
on the enforceable commitment: (a)
Does the commitment address a limited
portion of the CAA requirement; (b) is
the State capable of fulfilling its
commitment; and (c) is the commitment
for a reasonable and appropriate period
of time.25
We believe that, in acting on the
South Coast 2007 AQMP and revised
2007 State Strategy, circumstances
warrant the consideration of enforceable
commitments as part of the attainment
demonstrations for this area. As shown
in Table 8 above, the majority of
emission reductions needed to
demonstrate attainment and all of the
emission reductions needed to
demonstrate RFP come from rules and
regulations that were adopted prior to
the AQMP’s submittal in November
2007, i.e., they come from the baseline
measures.
As a result of these already-adopted
State and District efforts, most sources
24 Commitments approved by EPA under section
110(k)(3) of the CAA are enforceable by EPA and
citizens under, respectively, sections 113 and 304
of the CAA. In the past, EPA has approved
enforceable commitments and courts have enforced
these actions against states that failed to comply
with those commitments: See, e.g., American Lung
Ass’n of N.J. v. Kean, 670 F. Supp. 1285 (D.N.J.
1987), aff’d, 871 F.2d 319 (3rd Cir. 1989); NRDC,
Inc. v. N.Y. State Dept. of Env. Cons., 668 F. Supp.
848 (S.D.N.Y. 1987); Citizens for a Better Env’t v.
Deukmejian, 731 F. Supp. 1448, recon. granted in
par, 746 F. Supp. 976 (N.D. Cal. 1990); Coalition for
Clean Air v. South Coast Air Quality Mgt. Dist., No.
CV 97–6916–HLH, (C.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 1999).
Further, if a state fails to meet its commitments,
EPA could make a finding of failure to implement
the SIP under CAA Section 179(a), which starts an
18-month period for the State to correct the nonimplementation before mandatory sanctions are
imposed.
CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) provides that each SIP
‘‘shall include enforceable emission limitations and
other control measures, means or techniques * * *
as well as schedules and timetables for compliance,
as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the
applicable requirement of the Act.’’ Section
172(c)(6) of the Act, which applies to
nonattainment SIPs, is virtually identical to section
110(a)(2)(A). The language in these sections of the
CAA is quite broad, allowing a SIP to contain any
‘‘means or techniques’’ that EPA determines are
‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ to meet CAA
requirements, such that the area will attain as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the
designated date. Furthermore, the express
allowance for ‘‘schedules and timetables’’
demonstrates that Congress understood that all
required controls might not have to be in place
before a SIP could be fully approved.
25 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
upheld EPA’s interpretation of CAA sections
110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) and the Agency’s use and
application of the three factor test in approving
enforceable commitments in the 1-hour ozone SIP
for Houston-Galveston. BCCA Appeal Group et al.
v. EPA et al., 355 F.3d 817 (5th Cir. 2003).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
in the South Coast nonattainment area
were already subject to stringent rules
prior to the development of the 2007
State Strategy and the South Coast 2007
AQMP, leaving fewer and more
technologically challenging
opportunities to reduce emissions. In
the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the
revised 2007 State Strategy, the District
and CARB identified potential control
measures that could achieve the
additional emissions reductions needed
for attainment (See CARB Staff Report
on South Coast 2007 AQMP, pp. 17–20,
and revised 2007 State Strategy, p. 17).
However, the timeline needed to
develop, adopt, and implement these
measures went well beyond November
28, 2007, the submittal date of the South
Coast’s attainment plan. As discussed
above and below, since 2007, the State
and District have made progress meeting
their commitments, but have not
completely fulfilled them. Given these
circumstances, the reliance on
enforceable commitments in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP and the 2007 State
Strategy is warranted. We now consider
the three factors EPA uses to determine
whether enforceable commitments in
lieu of adopted measures are
approvable.
i. The Commitments Do Not Represent
a Limited Portion of Required
Reductions
First, we look to see if the
commitment addresses a limited portion
of a statutory requirement, such as the
amount of emissions reductions needed
in a nonattainment area. The remaining
portion of the enforceable commitments
in the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the
revised 2007 State Strategy are 141.7 tpd
NOX, 45.3 tpd VOC, 11.2 tpd direct
PM2.5 and 22.7 tpd SOX. When
compared to the State’s current estimate
of the emissions reductions needed for
PM2.5 attainment in 2014, the remaining
portion of the enforceable commitments
represent approximately 30% of the
needed NOX reductions, 18% of the
needed VOC reductions, 89% of the
needed PM2.5 reductions and 53% of the
needed SOX reductions. Historically,
EPA has generally approved
nonattainment area SIPs with
enforceable commitments in the range
of 10% or less of the total needed
emissions reductions. See, e.g., approval
of the San Joaquin Valley PM–10 SIP at
69 30005 (May 26, 2004), approval of
the San Joaquin 1-hour ozone plan at 75
FR 10420 (March 8, 2010), and approval
of the Houston-Galveston ozone SIP at
66 FR 57160, 57161 (November 14,
2001).
We note that there are significant
emissions reductions tied to the Cleaner
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks measure, and
the Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel
measure listed in the 2009 State Strategy
Status Report, page 5. EPA understands
that the State is working on adopting
and submitting these measures for EPA
approval. It is possible that the
reductions from these measures and
several outstanding District rules will
reduce the percentage of the remaining
portion of the emissions reductions
attributed to enforceable commitments
to below 10% of the total needed
reductions for each of the pollutants.
However, until these (or other) measures
are adopted, submitted to EPA and
approved (as necessary), we believe that
the percentages of enforceable
commitments for NOX, VOC, direct
PM2.5 and SOX, relied upon by the
South Coast 2007 AQMP and revised
2007 State Strategy are too high and not
a limited portion of the total emissions
reductions needed to meet the statutory
requirement for attainment in the South
Coast nonattainment area.
ii. The State is Capable of Fulfilling Its
Commitment
The second factor to consider for
enforceable commitments is whether the
State and District are capable of
fulfilling their commitments. As
discussed above, following the adoption
and submittal of the 2007 State Strategy,
CARB adopted and submitted the 2009
State Strategy Status Report which
shows the State’s progress in achieving
its enforceable commitments for the
South Coast and several other
nonattainment areas in California. The
revised 2007 State Strategy shows that
during 2007 and 2008, the State adopted
rules for 10 control measures identified
in the 2007 State Strategy and 3 control
measures that were not identified in the
2007 State Strategy that will contribute
to the needed PM2.5 reductions. See
2009 Status Report on State Strategy, p.
1, Highlights. While progress has been
made by the State to achieve its
enforceable commitments for reductions
of NOX, VOC, direct PM2.5 and SOX,
there are still significant reductions that
must be addressed in order to satisfy the
commitments. As discussed above, the
remaining portion of the enforceable
commitments is anywhere from 18–89%
for the relevant pollutants. The revised
2007 State Strategy includes a table with
estimates of the measures that may
fulfill the whole commitment. See 2009
Status Report on State Strategy, p. 17.
While the percentage of remaining
commitments is too high for EPA to
accept as part of an approvable
attainment demonstration, EPA believes
that the State and District have made
good progress in meeting their
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
enforceable commitments in the past.
Given the evidence of the State’s and
District’s efforts to date and their
continuing program to adopt controls,
we believe that the State and District are
capable of meeting their enforceable
commitments to achieve the necessary
reductions in the South Coast
nonattainment area by 2014.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
iii. The Commitment Is for a Reasonable
and Appropriate Timeframe
Finally, the third factor we consider is
whether the commitment is for a
reasonable and appropriate period of
time. In order to meet the commitment
to achieve the needed reductions by
2014, the South Coast 2007 AQMP and
the 2007 State Strategy projected an
ambitious rule development, adoption,
and implementation schedule. EPA
considers this projected schedule as
providing sufficient time to achieve the
committed reductions by 2014. As we
noted previously, many of the
scheduled measures have been adopted.
See Tables 2, 3, 5 and 6 above and the
2009 State Strategy Status Report, pp. 4,
17 & 23. The State and District are
continuing to evaluate their adopted
measures and the need for additional
emissions reductions from new
measures in this area. See District Board
Resolution 07–9 and the 2009 State
Strategy Status Report, p. 24. While we
believe the State and District have
provided a reasonable and appropriate
schedule for achieving their
commitments by 2014, as discussed
above, EPA is not proposing to approve
the attainment date extension for the
South Coast nonattainment area. Thus
we cannot currently conclude that the
third factor is satisfied.
b. Federal Reductions
As shown in Table 7, the South Coast
2007 AQMP assigns 10 tons per day of
NOX reductions to the Federal
government. The CAA does not
authorize a State to assign responsibility
to the Federal government for meeting
SIP requirements. However, we agree
that we have both the authority and the
responsibility under the Act for
regulating certain nationwide sources of
air pollution. The 1990 CAA
Amendments extended EPA’s authority
to regulate nonroad vehicles and
engines and expressly required EPA to
evaluate nonroad engine emissions,
determine whether these emissions
contribute significantly to ozone or CO
in areas which have failed to attain the
ozone or CO NAAQS, and regulate these
emissions categories if found to be
significant. EPA agrees with the State
that national mobile source emissions
are increasingly significant contributors
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
to PM2.5 and ozone pollution,
particularly in the South Coast. The
federal government has adopted a
variety of national measures that have
reduced emissions in the South Coast
and will continue to explore future
reduction opportunities. South Coast
may take credit for these reductions in
its attainment plans. The District may
not, however, assign a reduction target
to the federal government as it has done
in the 2007 AQMP.
In May 2004, as part of the Clean Air
Nonroad Diesel Rule, EPA finalized new
requirements for nonroad diesel fuel
that decreased the allowable levels of
sulfur in fuel used in locomotives by 99
percent.26 The requirement for
locomotives to use ultra-low sulfur
diesel takes effect in 2012. These fuel
improvements have created and will
continue to result in significant
environmental and public health
benefits by reducing PM2.5 from existing
engines. In addition, in March 2008,
EPA finalized a three-part program that
reduces emissions from diesel
locomotives of all types—line-haul,
switch, and passenger rail.27 The
Locomotive and Marine Diesel Engine
rule cuts PM2.5 emissions from these
engines by as much as 90 percent and
NOX emissions by as much as 80
percent when fully implemented. This
rule sets new emission standards for
existing locomotives when they are
remanufactured. The rule also includes
Tier 3 emission standards for newlybuilt locomotives, provisions for clean
switch locomotives, and idle reduction
requirements for new and
remanufactured locomotives. The Tier 3
emissions standards for locomotives
started to phase-in in 2009. Finally, the
Locomotive and Marine Diesel Engine
rule establishes long-term, Tier 4,
standards for newly-built engines based
on the application of high-efficiency
catalytic after treatment technology,
beginning in 2015. See 73 FR 37096. To
the extent that these and other Federal
programs yield additional reductions in
the South Coast by 2014, the South
Coast 2007 AQMP and State Strategy
can be revised to reflect these
reductions.
However, as stated above, because the
CAA does not authorize States to assign
responsibility for meeting emission
reduction requirements to the EPA, we
26 See 69 FR 38957, ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air
Pollution from Nonroad Diesel Engines’’, also
referred to as the ‘‘Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule’’,
June 29, 2004.
27 See 73 FR 37095, ‘‘Control of Emissions of Air
Pollution from Locomotives and Marine
Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters
per Cylinder,’’ also referred to as the ‘‘Locomotive
and Marine Diesel Engine Rule,’’ June 30, 2008.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71309
are proposing to disapprove the 10 tpd
NOX emissions reductions the District
and State assigned to the Federal
government in the South Coast 2007
AQMP.
5. Proposed Action on Attainment
Demonstrations
In order to approve a SIP’s attainment
demonstration, EPA must make several
findings and approve the plan’s
proposed attainment date.
First, we must find that the
demonstration’s technical bases,
including the emissions inventories and
air quality modeling, are adequate. As
discussed above in section IV.B and
IV.D, we are proposing to approve these
portions of the South Coast 2007 AQMP.
Second, we must find that the SIP
submittal provides for expeditious
attainment through the implementation
of all RACM and RACT. As discussed
above in section IV.C., we are proposing
to disapprove the RACM/RACT
demonstration in the South Coast South
Coast 2007 AQMP.
Third, EPA must find that the
emissions reductions that are relied on
for attainment are creditable. As
discussed above in section IV.D.5.a., the
South Coast 2007 AQMP relies on
enforceable commitments for almost 27
percent of the State’s current estimate of
the total emissions reductions needed in
this area. See Table 8. While EPA has
previously accepted enforceable
commitments in lieu of adopted control
measures in attainment demonstrations,
EPA has done so only when the
circumstances warranted it and the
commitments met three criteria. We
believe that circumstances here warrant
the consideration of enforceable
commitments. We also believe that both
the State and the District have
demonstrated their capability to meet
their commitments. However, the
commitments do not constitute a
limited portion of the required
emissions reductions, and are not for an
appropriate timeframe. The State’s and
District’s unfulfilled commitments
currently represent 30 percent of the
NOX reductions, 18 percent of the VOC
reductions, 89 percent of the PM2.5
reductions, and 53 percent of the SOX
emissions reductions currently
estimated to be required for attainment
of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South
Coast nonattainment area. These
percentages are well above the 10
percent figure of total reductions needed
for attainment generally accepted by
EPA to approve an attainment
demonstration that relies in part on
enforceable commitments. The
timeframe of 2014 is not currently
appropriate since we are not proposing
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71310
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
to grant the State’s request for the full
attainment date extension to 2015.
Finally, for PM2.5 nonattainment areas
that demonstrate that they cannot attain
within five years of designation as
nonattainment, EPA must grant an
extension of the attainment date in
order to approve the attainment
demonstration for the area. As discussed
above in section IV.D.4., we are
proposing not to grant the State’s
request to extend the attainment date in
the South Coast nonattainment area to
April 5, 2015 because we cannot at this
time approve the attainment
demonstration.
For the foregoing reasons, we are
proposing to disapprove the attainment
demonstration in the South Coast 2007
AQMP. As noted above, however, we
believe that the State and District are in
a position to address these issues in the
relatively near term, before we take final
action. We look forward to working with
the State and District in the coming
months.
E. RFP Demonstration
1. Requirements for Reasonable Further
Progress
CAA Section 172(c)(2) requires that
plans for nonattainment areas shall
provide for reasonable further progress
(RFP). RFP is defined in section 171(1)
as ‘‘such annual incremental reductions
in emissions of the relevant air pollutant
as are required by this part or may
reasonably be required by the
Administrator for the purpose of
ensuring attainment of the applicable
[NAAQS] by the applicable date.’’
The PM2.5 implementation rule
requires submission of a specific RFP
demonstration at the same time as the
attainment demonstration for any area
for which the State justifies an
extension of the attainment date beyond
2010. For areas seeking an attainment
date extension to 2015 such as the
South Coast, the RFP demonstration
must show that in the applicable
milestone years of 2009 and 2012,
emissions in the area will be at a level
consistent with generally linear progress
in reducing emissions between the base
year and the attainment year. See 40
CFR 51.1009(d). States may demonstrate
this by showing that emissions for each
milestone year are roughly equivalent to
benchmark emission levels for direct
PM2.5 emissions and each PM2.5
attainment plan precursor addressed in
the plan. The steps for determining the
benchmark emissions levels to
demonstrate generally linear progress
are given in the PM2.5 implementation
rule in 40 CFR 51.1009(f).
The RFP plan must describe the
control measures that provide for
meeting the reasonable further progress
milestones for the area, the timing of
implementation of those measures, and
the expected reductions in emissions of
directly-emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5
attainment plan precursors. See 40 CFR
§ 51.1009(c).
2. RFP Demonstration in the South
Coast 2007 AQMP
The RFP demonstration is in Chapter
6 of the South Coast 2007 AQMP. The
demonstration addresses direct PM2.5,
NOX, VOC, and SOX emissions and uses
the 2002 annual average inventory as
the baseline year inventory and 2014 as
the attainment year. Table 9 below
summarizes the South Coast PM2.5 RFP
demonstration. See South Coast 2007
AQMP, Table 6–3A.
TABLE 9—SOUTH COAST RFP DEMONSTRATION
Pollutant
NOX
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
2002 baseline inventory (tpd) ..........................................................................................
Annual percentage change needed to show linear progress (%) ...................................
2009 target needed to show linear progress (tpd) ..........................................................
2009 remaining emissions with plan (tpd) .......................................................................
Projected shortfall (tpd) ...................................................................................................
2012 target needed to show linear progress (tpd) ..........................................................
2012 remaining emissions with plan (tpd) .......................................................................
Projected shortfall (tpd) ...................................................................................................
2014 remaining emissions with plan (tpd) .......................................................................
As discussed above, the District’s
modeling demonstration indicated that
for attainment of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, SOX reductions are the most
effective, followed by directly-emitted
PM2.5, and then NOX and VOC.
Therefore, the District’s proposed
control strategy maximizes reductions of
direct PM2.5 and SOX to the extent
possible. The RFP demonstration for
2009 shows a shortfall of 7 tpd of
directly-emitted PM2.5 and 93 tpd of
NOX while the SOX and VOC reductions
exceed their linear targets. The RFP
demonstration for 2012 indicates a
slight shortfall in meeting the 2012
milestones for directly-emitted PM2.5
and for NOX, although SOX and PM2.5
targets are not only met but surpassed.
While the shortfall of 93 tpd for NOX in
2009 is significant, this shortfall is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
1,093
4.87
720
813
93
561
565
4
459
almost completely made up by the
reductions estimated for 2012. We note
that the shortfall in 2012 for PM2.5 is
only about 3% of the 2002 baseline
inventory, and the shortfall in NOX
reductions is less than 1%, while SOX
and VOC reduction milestones are
exceeded by more than 4% and 3%
respectively. Thus, we find that the RFP
demonstration for 2012 meets the
‘‘generally linear’’ test for RFP
requirements for 2012 and addresses the
shortfall of NOX in 2009.
3. Proposed Action on the RFP
Demonstration
While we believe the District has
demonstrated generally linear progress
towards attainment by 2015, we are not
proposing to approve the attainment
date extension to 2015 and therefore
cannot propose to approve the RFP
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
VOC
844
3.7
625
578
0
532
505
0
464
PM2.5
99
1.01
92
99
7
89
92
3
87
SOX
53
5.35
33
28
0
25
21
0
19
demonstration. We believe, however,
that if the deficiencies identified with
the attainment demonstration are
addressed, we may then be able to
propose to approve the attainment date
extension and RFP demonstration. See
40 CFR 51.1009.
F. Contingency Measures
1. Requirements for Contingency
Measures
Under CAA section 172(c)(9), all
PM2.5 attainment plans must include
contingency measures to be
implemented if an area fails to meet RFP
(‘‘RFP contingency measures’’) and
contingency measures to be
implemented if an area fails to attain the
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date (‘‘attainment
contingency measures’’). These
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
CTY–01—Offsetting potential
emissions increase due to change in
natural gas specifications—This
proposed contingency measure requires
RECLAIM facilities that use natural gas
of a quality that creates more emissions
to offset these emissions for all
pollutants. The measure is listed as a
‘‘Remaining 2003 AQMP Revision
Control Measure’’ and thus was relied
on in the 2003 AQMP for attainment. In
addition, the reductions are not
quantified, and may be zero, since the
proposed measure may only reduce
future emissions increases rather than
provide net reductions. The measure is
not triggered by failure to meet RFP or
attainment and there is no defined
implementation schedule. For these
reasons, this proposed measure does not
meet CAA requirements for contingency
measures.
CTY–02—Clean Air Act Emission
Fees for Major Stationary Sources—This
proposed contingency measure would
use fees generated from the District’s
2. Contingency Measures in the South
Rule 317, Clean Air Act Nonattainment
Coast 2007 AQMP
Fees, to achieve emissions reductions.
The implementation of Rule 317 is
The attainment plan for the South
triggered by a failure of the South Coast
Coast nonattainment area includes
to attain the 1-hour standard by its
contingency measures to be
applicable attainment date (which can
implemented if the area fails to attain by
occur no earlier than November 15,
its attainment date or fails to meet RFP
2010) and not by any failure to make
requirements. The contingency
RFP or to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS, a
measures for the South Coast
minimum requirement for contingency
nonattainment area are described in
measures for PM2.5 SIPs. There is no
Chapter 9 of the South Coast 2007
implementation schedule provided, and
AQMP and discussed in more detail in
the AQMP does not quantify the
Appendix IV–A, section 2 of the AQMP. reductions associated with this measure.
They are described below.
For these reasons, this proposed
The South Coast 2007 AQMP
measure does not meet CAA
describes the contingency measures in
requirements for contingency measures.
the following way, ‘‘Although
CTY–03—Banning pre-Tier 3 off road
implementation of these measures is
diesel engines on High Pollution
expected to reduce emissions, there are
Advisory (HPA) days—This proposed
issues that limit the viability of these
contingency measure would
measures as AQMP control measures at
complement a CARB rule which
this time. Issues surrounding these
proposed to establish declining fleet
measures include, but are not limited to average emissions levels for off-road
availability of District resources to
equipment over 25 horsepower (hp).
implement and enforce the measure,
The District proposed a complementary
cost-effectiveness of the measure,
measure, SC–OFFRD–1, that would ban
potential adverse environmental
the use of pre-Tier 3 off-road diesel
impacts, potential economic impacts,
engines after 2023 on HPA days should
effectiveness of emissions reductions,
the South Coast nonattainment area fail
and availability of methods to quantify
to meet the 8-hour ozone standard. This
emissions reductions.’’ South Coast 2007 proposed contingency measure would
AQMP, page 9–1. The contingency
require additional rulemaking at the
measures do not meet the requirements
District level, as it is not currently
of the CAA, namely the requirements for adopted. It also would be implemented
these contingency measures to be fully
too late in time to provide for RFP or
adopted or otherwise ready for quick
contingency reductions for PM2.5 RFP or
implementation, for trigger mechanisms attainment. In addition, the AQMP does
and an implementation schedule, and
not quantify the reductions associated
the AQMP does not provide for
with this measure. For these reasons,
quantification of emissions reductions
this proposed measure does not meet
demonstrating the equivalent of one
CAA requirements for contingency
year of RFP.
measures.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
contingency measures must be fully
adopted rules or control measures that
are ready to be implemented quickly
without significant additional action by
the State. 40 CFR 51.1012. They must
also be measures not relied on in the
plan to demonstrate RFP or attainment
and should provide SIP-creditable
emissions reductions equivalent to one
year of RFP. Finally, the SIP should
contain trigger mechanisms for the
contingency measures and specify a
schedule for their implementation. 72
FR 20586, p. 20642.
Contingency measures can include
Federal measures and local measures
already scheduled for implementation
that provide emissions reductions in
excess of those needed to provide for
RFP or expeditious attainment. EPA has
approved numerous SIPs under this
interpretation. See, e.g., 62 FR 15844,
April 3, 1997; 62 FR 66279, December
18, 1997; 66 FR 30811, June 8, 2001; 66
FR 586 and 66 FR 634, January 3, 2001.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71311
CTY–04—Accelerated
implementation of CARB’s mobile
source measures—This proposed
contingency measure, which could
function as both an RFP and an
attainment contingency measure,
requires the District’s Board to request
that CARB accelerate the adoption and/
or implementation of the remaining
control measures that have not been
adopted or fully implemented by one
year. South Coast 2007 AQMP, page
9–3. Under CAA section 172(c)(9) and
EPA’s long-standing policies
interpreting this section, contingency
measures must require minimal
additional rulemaking by the State and
take effect within a few months of a
failure to make RFP or to attain. This
proposed contingency measure would
require additional rulemaking at the
District level and potentially substantial
and lengthy additional rulemaking at
the State level to be implemented. There
is no trigger mechanism or
implementation schedule provided, and
the AQMP does not quantify the
reductions associated with this measure.
For these reasons, this proposed
measure does not meet CAA
requirements for contingency measures.
Post-Attainment-Year Emissions
Reductions. We note that we are not
proposing to approve the attainment
date extension. However, even if it were
approved, excess reductions in 2015/
2016 from CARB mobile source
measures do not fully address the
contingency measure requirement for
the PM2.5 attainment year. There is no
calculation of the emissions reductions
equivalent of one year’s work of RFP in
the South Coast 2007 AQMP. However,
from information in the Plan, we
calculate one year’s worth of RFP to be
1.08 tpd PM2.5, 52.8 tpd NOX, 30.8 tpd
of VOC, and 2.75 tpd SO2. See TSD,
section II.H, and CARB Staff Report on
the 2007 South Coast AQMP, Appendix
A. However, CARB’s mobile source
measures do not provide sufficient NOX
reductions to meet one year’s worth of
RFP; therefore, post-attainment-year
emissions reductions cannot be used to
meet the CAA contingency measure
requirement.
3. Proposed Action on the Contingency
Measures
The South Coast 2007 AQMP includes
suggestions for several measures that do
not meet the CAA’s minimum
requirements (e.g., no additional
rulemaking, surplus to attainment and
RFP needs). The AQMP, however,
indicates that the measures proposed by
the District are not adopted, and does
not quantify the expected emissions
reductions in order to gauge whether
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71312
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
they provide reductions equivalent to
one year’s worth of RFP. For the reasons
stated above, we are proposing to
disapprove the District’s contingency
measure provisions in the South Coast
2007 AQMP for PM2.5.
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. Our
transportation conformity rule (codified
in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A) requires
that transportation plans, programs, and
projects conform to SIPs and establishes
the criteria and procedures for
determining whether or not they do so.
Conformity to the SIP means that
transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards or any
interim milestone.
Control strategy SIP submittals (such
as RFP and attainment SIP submittals)
must specify the maximum emissions of
transportation-related emissions
allowed in the RFP years and attainment
year, i.e., the motor vehicle emissions
budgets (‘‘budgets’’). The submittal must
also demonstrate that these emissions
levels, when considered with emissions
from all other sources, are consistent
with RFP or attainment of the NAAQS,
whichever is applicable. In order for us
to find these emissions levels or
‘‘budgets’’ adequate and/or approvable,
the submittal must meet the conformity
adequacy provisions of 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and (5). Additionally, motor
vehicle emissions budgets cannot be
approved until EPA completes a
detailed review of the entire SIP and
determines that the SIP and the budgets
will achieve their intended purpose
(i.e., RFP, attainment or maintenance).
For more information on the
transportation conformity requirement
and applicable policies on budgets,
please visit our transportation
conformity Web site at: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/index.htm.
As submitted on November 28, 2007,
the 2007 South Coast AQMP included a
set of PM2.5 budgets for RFP years 2009
and 2012, the attainment year 2014, and
analysis years 2023 and 2030. See CARB
Resolution 07–05, which revised the
budgets in the 2007 South Coast AQMP
as adopted by the District, and which
was included in the November 28, 2007
submittal. We refer herein to these
budgets as the ‘‘original’’ budgets. On
April 30, 2008, CARB submitted a SIP
revision that replaces the original set of
PM2.5 budgets with two new sets of
budgets (herein, ‘‘replacement’’ budgets).
One set of the replacement budgets is
referred to as ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets, and
the other set is referred to as ‘‘baseline’’
budgets. In its April 30, 2008 submittal,
CARB requests that EPA give primary
consideration to the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets
and only find the ‘‘baseline’’ budgets to
be adequate if EPA cannot find the ‘‘SIPbased’’ budgets adequate in their
entirety.
The replacement budgets submitted
on April 30, 2008 differ from the
original budgets in that they reflect the
EPA-approved EMFAC2007 motor
vehicle emissions factor model (See 73
FR 3464, January 18, 2008) rather than
District’s CEPA emission factor model,
which had been used for the original
budgets. The ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets reflect
emissions reductions from rules
adopted by October 2006 and also from
control measures CARB expects to adopt
in regulatory form in the future. The
‘‘baseline’’ budgets differ from the ‘‘SIPbased’’ budgets by excluding emission
reductions from control measures in the
2007 State Strategy that had not been
adopted in regulatory form by October
2006.28 Moreover, the ‘‘baseline’’
budgets are only established for RFP
years 2009 and 2012 whereas the ‘‘SIPbased’’ budgets are established for the
RFP years, the attainment year, and
analysis years 2023 and 2030. The two
sets of PM2.5 budgets (i.e., the
replacement budgets) are shown in
Tables 10 and 11, below.
TABLE 10—‘‘SIP-BASED’’ PM2.5 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS
[Annual average tons per day]
Budget year
VOC
NOX
PM2.5
2009
2012
2014
2023
2030
196
139
122
89
75
413
276
201
131
121
38
37
33
37
39
TABLE 11—‘‘BASELINE’’
2.5 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
[Annual average tons per day]
BUDGETS
VOC
NOX
PM2.5
2009
2012
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Budget year
196
163
413
337
38
38
On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted
a SIP revision that updates certain
portions of the 2007 State Strategy to
account for emission reductions from
regulations adopted in 2007 and 2008,
some of which relate to on-road sources,
such as modifications to the
reformulated gasoline program, smog
check improvements, and cleaner in-use
heavy duty trucks. CARB’s August 12,
2009 SIP revision did not revise the
budgets but documents the extent to
which control measures for which credit
had been taken in the ‘‘SIP-based’’
budgets, but not in the ‘‘baseline’’
budgets, have now been adopted in
regulatory form.
EPA generally first reviews budgets
submitted with an attainment, RFP, or
maintenance plan for adequacy, prior to
taking action on the plan itself, and did
so with respect to the PM2.5 budgets in
the 2007 South Coast AQMP. The
availability of the original budgets was
announced for public comment on
EPA’s adequacy Web page on February
28 With respect to the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budget for RFP
year 2009, however, CARB did exclude the
emissions reductions from measures not adopted by
October 2006. Thus, the ‘‘SIP-based’’ PM2.5 budget
for 2009 is the same as the ‘‘baseline’’ PM2.5 budget
for that year.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
12, 2008 and the availability of the
replacement (then available in draft
form) was announced for public
comment on March 27, 2008. EPA
received comments from the public in
response to both postings.
On May 6, 2008, we found the ‘‘SIPbased’’ PM2.5 budgets for the 2007 South
Coast AQMP, as revised on April 30,
2008, to be inadequate for transportation
conformity purposes. See the letter and
enclosures dated May 6, 2008 from
Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division,
EPA Region IX to James Goldstene,
Executive Officer, CARB (a copy of
which has been placed in the docket for
this rulemaking). However, in our May
2008 adequacy determination, we found
the ‘‘baseline’’ PM2.5 budgets for RFP
years 2009 and 2012 to be adequate.
Generally, we found the ‘‘SIP-based’’
budgets to be inadequate because they
reflected control measures not yet
adopted in regulatory form and thus not
adequately quantified or supported by
the plan. In contrast, we found the
‘‘baseline’’ PM2.5 budgets to be consistent
with the plan’s RFP demonstration and
to be based on adopted mobile source
regulations that have already been
implemented. Our notice of adequacy/
inadequacy of the budgets was
published on May 15, 2008 at 73 FR
28110 (corrected on June 18, 2008 at 73
FR 34837), and was effective on May 30,
2008.
The criteria by which we determine
whether a SIP’s budgets are adequate
and approvable for conformity purposes
are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and
(5). The following paragraphs provide
our review of the ‘‘SIP-based’’ and
‘‘baseline’’ PM2.5 budgets for the 2007
South Coast AQMP against our
adequacy criteria and provide the basis
for our proposed action relative to the
budgets. Since the criteria for evaluation
purposes are the same for adequacy or
inadequacy as for approval or
disapproval of budgets, we incorporate
by reference our earlier determination of
adequacy/inadequacy, and focus in the
following paragraphs on those
considerations that have changed since
the time of our May 2008 adequacy/
inadequacy determination.
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(i), we
review a submitted plan to determine
whether the plan was endorsed by the
Governor (or designee) and was subject
to a public hearing. As documented in
our May 2008 adequacy/inadequacy
determination, the 2007 South Coast
AQMP and 2007 State Strategy, and
April 2008 replacement budgets, were
all submitted under cover of letters
signed by CARB’s Executive Officer, the
Governor’s designee. Likewise, CARB’s
August 12, 2009 SIP revision was
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
submitted under cover of a letter sent by
CARB’s Executive Officer and includes
documentation of a public hearing held
on April 23–24, 2009. Therefore, we
propose that the submitted plan and
related ‘‘SIP-based’’ and ‘‘baseline’’
budgets meet the criterion under 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(i).
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(ii), we
review a submitted plan to determine
whether the plan was developed
through consultation with Federal, State
and local agencies and whether full
implementation plan documentation
was provided to EPA and EPA’s stated
concerns, if any, were addressed. As
documented in our May 2008 adequacy/
inadequacy determination, the 2007
South Coast AQMP and 2007 State
Strategy, and April 2008 replacement
budgets, were all developed through
consultation with Federal, State and
local agencies and included
documentation of adequate responses to
EPA’s concerns. Moreover, CARB’s
August 12, 2009 SIP revision was
developed to meet EPA’s requests for
additional information to aid in our
review of the 2007 South Coast AQMP
and 2007 State Strategy. We propose
that the submitted plan, and related
‘‘SIP-based’’ and ‘‘baseline’’ budgets,
were developed through sufficient
consultation with Federal, State and
local agencies and thereby meet the
criterion under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(ii).
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), we
review a submitted plan to determine
whether the budgets are clearly
identified and precisely quantified. Both
the ‘‘SIP-based’’ and ‘‘baseline’’ budgets
are clearly identified. As noted in our
May 2008 adequacy/inadequacy
determination, the budgets are shown in
attachments 1 (‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets) and
2 (‘‘baseline’’ budgets) to CARB
Resolution 08–27, which was included
in the SIP revision submitted by CARB
on April 30, 2008. The ‘‘SIP-based’’
budgets are not precisely quantified
because the new emission reductions do
not result from adequately specified
control measures. In contrast, the
‘‘baseline’’ budgets reflect control
measures that are already implemented
and do not include new emission
reductions attributed to general
commitments; therefore, these budgets
are precisely quantified. We propose
that the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets do not meet
the criterion under 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iii) but the ‘‘baseline’’
budgets do.
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv), we
review a submitted plan to determine
whether the budgets, when considered
together with all other emissions
sources, are consistent with applicable
requirements for reasonable further
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71313
progress, attainment, or maintenance
(whichever is relevant to a given SIP
submission). Based on our proposed
disapproval of the RFP and attainment
demonstrations (See sections IV.D and
IV.E of this document), EPA proposes
that all of the ‘‘SIP-based’’ and the
‘‘baseline’’ budgets, when considered
together with all other emission sources,
are not consistent with the requirement
to demonstrate attainment or RFP of the
PM2.5 NAAQS by 2014.
Because we are proposing to
disapprove the RFP demonstrations for
years 2009 and 2012, we do encourage
CARB to submit revised budgets to lock
in the benefit of the new regulations and
thereby avoid the chance that increases
in vehicle activity will increase the
overall challenge of attaining the
NAAQS. For the reasons stated above,
we propose that the ‘‘baseline’’ and ‘‘SIPbased’’ budgets do not meet the criterion
under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv).
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v), we
review a plan to determine whether the
budgets are consistent with and clearly
related to the emissions inventory and
the control measures in the submitted
control strategy plan or maintenance
plan. The plan, as supplemented by the
SIP revision dated August 12, 2009,
does not show a clear relationship
between the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets and
the emissions inventory and control
measures. The ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets
incorporate new emission reductions
from the State’s strategy that result, in
part, from specified control measures
that have not been adopted in regulatory
form (or have been adequately
supported as a voluntary measure). As
noted above, more control measures
have been adopted by CARB in
regulatory form than was the case when
the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets were adopted
and submitted by CARB to EPA, but a
portion of the emission reductions
included in the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets
remains unsupported by regulations or
as a voluntary measure. In contrast, as
discussed further in our May 2008
adequacy/inadequacy determination,
the plan does show a clear relationship
between the ‘‘baseline’’ budgets, control
measures, and the total emissions
inventory. Thus, we propose that the
submitted plan’s ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets do
not meet this criterion for adequacy and
approval and the ‘‘baseline’’ budgets do.
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(vi), we
review a submitted plan to determine
whether revisions to previously
submitted plans explain and document
any changes to previously submitted
budgets and control measures; impacts
on point and area source emissions; any
changes to established safety margins;
and reasons for the changes (including
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
71314
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
the basis for any changes related to
emissions factors or estimates of vehicle
miles traveled and changes in control
measures). As noted in our May 2008
adequacy/inadequacy determination,
the SIP revision submitted on April 30,
2008 explains and documents all
changes to previously submitted
budgets. Thus, we propose that the
submitted plan meets this criterion for
adequacy and approval with respect to
both the ‘‘SIP-based’’ and ‘‘baseline’’
budgets.
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(5), we review
the State’s compilation of public
comments and response to comments
that are required to be submitted with
any SIP revision. As noted in our May
2008 adequacy/inadequacy
determination, District compiled public
comments submitted during the June 1,
2007 public hearing and during the
public comment periods and we
reviewed this compilation and found
that District’s and CARB’s responses
were acceptable. No issues that might
have affected our adequacy findings
remain unanswered. Thus, we propose
that the plan meets this criterion for
adequacy and approval with respect to
both the ‘‘SIP-based’’ and ‘‘baseline’’
budgets.
For the reasons described in the May
6, 2008 letter from Deborah Jordan to
James Goldstene, we found that the
‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets for the 2007 South
Coast AQMP, as submitted on April 30,
2008, do not meet certain adequacy
requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
and (5) and concluded that they were
inadequate for transportation
conformity purposes. Now that we have
completed a thorough review of the
entire South Coast PM2.5 SIP, which is
described above in this proposal, we
have concluded that the ‘‘SIP-based’’
budgets are not precisely quantified
because the new emission reductions do
not result from adequately specified
control measures, and that the plan as
a whole will not ensure RFP and
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS and
does not show a clear relationship
between the ‘‘SIP-based’’ budgets and
the emissions inventory and control
measures. Thus, we propose to
disapprove both the ‘‘baseline’’ and the
‘‘SIP-based’’ PM2.5 budgets (shown in
Table 11 above) for transportation
conformity purposes. SCAG and the
U.S. Department of Transportation are
not currently using the ‘‘SIP-based’’
budgets in transportation conformity
determinations due to the inadequacy
finding made in 2008. If the proposed
disapproval of the budgets is finalized,
then neither the ‘‘baseline’’ nor ‘‘SIPbased’’ budgets could be used in
transportation conformity
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
AQMP to the extent that these
commitments have not yet been
fulfilled, and to achieve specific
aggregate emission reductions of 32 tpd
of NOX, 10 tpd of VOC, 4 tpd of direct
PM2.5, and 3 tpd of SOX by 2014 as
listed in Table 4–10 of the South Coast
2007 AQMP and the CARB Staff Report
for the South Coast 2007 AQMP, page
17, as SIP-strengthening;
3. CARB’s commitments to propose
certain defined measures, as listed on
I. Mid Course Review
page 23 of the 2009 State Strategy Status
Any State that submits to EPA an
Report; and to achieve aggregate
approvable attainment plan for a PM2.5
emission reductions of 152 tpd of NOX,
nonattainment area justifying an
9 tpd of direct PM2.5, 46 tpd of VOC, and
attainment date of nine or ten years
20 tpd of SOX in the South Coast
from the date of designation also must
nonattainment area by 2014 as
submit to EPA a mid-course review six
provided, as SIP-strengthening; and
4. the air quality modeling in the
years from the date of designation, or by
South Coast 2007 AQMP as meeting the
April 2011. 40 CFR 51.1011. The midrequirements of the CAA and EPA
course review for an area must include:
guidance.
(1) A review of emissions reductions
EPA is proposing to disapprove under
and progress made in implementing
control measures to reduce emissions of CAA section 110(k)(3) the following
elements of the South Coast PM2.5
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 attainment plan
attainment SIP:
precursors contributing to PM2.5
1. The attainment demonstration for
concentrations in the area; (2) an
failing to meet the requirements of CAA
analysis of changes in ambient air
quality data for the area; (3) a revised air section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1007
due to insufficient adopted and EPAquality modeling analysis to
approved rules needed to support the
demonstrate attainment; (4) any new or
revised control measures adopted by the determination that the South Coast
State, as necessary to ensure attainment nonattainment area will attain by the
State’s proposed attainment date. As a
by the attainment date in the approved
result, we are also proposing to
SIP of the nonattainment area. We
disapprove the RACM/RACT
anticipate receiving this midcourse
demonstration, the State’s request for an
review from the District and CARB by
attainment date extension to April 5,
April 2011.
2015, and the RFP demonstration,
V. EPA’s Proposed Actions
because they are dependent on the
approval of an attainment
A. EPA’s Proposed Approvals and
demonstration under the PM2.5
Disapprovals
implementation rule (See 40 CFR
For the reasons discussed above, EPA 51.1009, 51.1010, and 51.1004);
is proposing to approve in part and
2. The motor vehicle emissions
disapprove in part California’s
budgets for the RFP milestone years of
attainment SIP for the South Coast
2009 and 2012, and for the attainment
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5
year, because they are derived from RFP
NAAQS. This SIP submittal consists of
and attainment demonstrations which
the portions of the District’s South Coast we are proposing to disapprove;
2007 AQMP and the South Coast
3. The contingency measures for
nonattainment area-specific portions of
failing to meet the requirements of CAA
CARB’s revised 2007 State Strategy
section 172(c)(9) and 40 CFR 51.1012;
addressing CAA and EPA regulations for and
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for
4. The assignment of 10 tpd of NOX
the South Coast nonattainment area.
to the federal government.
EPA is proposing to approve under
B. CAA Consequences of a Final
CAA section 110(k)(3) the following
Disapproval
elements of the South Coast PM2.5
EPA is committed to working with the
attainment SIP:
District, CARB and SCAG to resolve the
1. The SIP’s base year and baseline
identified problems that make the
emissions inventories as meeting the
current South Coast 2007 AQMP for the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3)
South Coast nonattainment area for the
and 40 CFR § 51.1008;
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS not fully approvable
2. the District’s commitments for the
adoption and implementation schedule
under the CAA. We firmly believe that
for specific control measures listed in
such solutions are available and that
Table 7–3 in the South Coast 2007
expeditious attainment of the 1997
determinations after the effective date of
the disapproval.
In summary, for the reasons discussed
above, we are now proposing
disapproval of the PM2.5 budgets that we
previously had determined to be
inadequate. Because we are proposing to
disapprove the RFP demonstration, we
are proposing to disapprove the PM2.5
budgets we previously found adequate
as well.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
PM2.5 standards in the South Coast is
achievable.
However, should we finalize the
disapprovals as proposed here, a
conformity freeze would take effect once
the action becomes effective (usually 30
days after publication of the final action
in the Federal Register). A conformity
freeze means that only projects in the
first four years of the most recent
conforming Regional Transportation
Plan (RTP) and Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) can
proceed. During a freeze, no new RTPs,
TIPs or RTP/TIP amendments can be
found to conform. See 40 CFR 93.120.
In addition to the effect on
conformity, should we finalize the
disapprovals proposed here, the offset
sanction in CAA section 179(b)(2)
would apply in the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area 18 months after the
effective date of a final disapproval. The
highway funding sanctions in CAA
section 179(b)(1) would apply in the
area six months after the offset sanction
is imposed. Neither sanction will be
imposed if California submits and we
approve prior to the implementation of
the sanctions, SIP revisions that correct
the problems identified in EPA’s final
action on the South Coast 2007 AQMP
and applicable portions of the revised
2007 State Strategy that are the basis for
any disapprovals.
In addition to the sanctions, CAA
section 110(c)(1) provides that EPA
must promulgate a federal
implementation plan addressing the
deficient elements in the PM2.5
attainment SIP for the South Coast, two
years after the effective date of any
disapproval should we not be able to
approve a revised SIP revision before
that date.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to partially approve and
partially disapprove state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:58 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this
proposed SIP disapproval under section
110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself
create any new information collection
burdens but simply disapproves certain
State requirements for inclusion into the
SIP. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to conduct
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements unless the
agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small not-for-profit enterprises, and
small governmental jurisdictions. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of
today’s rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule does not impose any
requirements or create impacts on small
entities. This proposed SIP disapproval
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act will not in-andof itself create any new requirements
but simply disapproves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP.
Accordingly, it affords no opportunity
for EPA to fashion for small entities less
burdensome compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables or
exemptions from all or part of the rule.
The fact that the Clean Air Act
prescribes that various consequences
(e.g., higher offset requirements) may or
will flow from this disapproval does not
mean that EPA either can or must
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis
for this action. Therefore, this action
will not have a significant economic
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
71315
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of this proposed rule
on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such
impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal
mandates under the provisions of Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538 for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector.’’ EPA
has determined that the proposed
disapproval action does not include a
Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more
to either State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate, or to the
private sector. This action proposes to
disapprove pre-existing requirements
under State or local law, and imposes
no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.’’
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, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, because it
merely disapproves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP
and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP EPA is proposing
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
71316
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules
to disapprove would not apply in Indian
country located in the state, and EPA
notes that it will not impose substantial
direct 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
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it is not an
economically significant regulatory
action based on health or safety risks
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This proposed
SIP disapproval under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act
will not in-and-of itself create any new
regulations but simply disapproves
certain State requirements for inclusion
into the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3
This proposed rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Nov 19, 2010
Jkt 223001
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
The EPA believes that this action is
not subject to requirements of Section
12(d) of NTTAA because application of
those requirements would be
inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
proposed action. In reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or
disapprove state choices, based on the
criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to disapprove certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act and will not inand-of itself create any new
requirements. Accordingly, it does not
provide EPA with the discretionary
authority to address, as appropriate,
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable
and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 8, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010–29235 Filed 11–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\22NOP3.SGM
22NOP3
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71294-71316]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29235]
[[Page 71293]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 52
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; 2007 South Coast State Implementation Plan for 1997 Fine
Particulate Matter Standards; 2007 State Strategy;
PM[bdi2].[bdi5]; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 71294]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0366; FRL-9229-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; 2007 South Coast State Implementation Plan for 1997 Fine
Particulate Matter Standards; 2007 State Strategy;
PM[ihel2].[ihel5]
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part
State implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
California to provide for attainment of the 1997 annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the
Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin area (South Coast nonattainment
area). The submitted SIP revisions are contained in the South Coast
2007 Air Quality Management Plan (South Coast 2007 AQMP) and portions
of the 2007 State Strategy as revised in 2009. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to approve the emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's fine particulate
implementing regulations. EPA is also proposing to approve commitments
to propose specific measures and meet specific aggregate emissions
reductions by the South Coast Air Quality Management (District) and the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) because the commitments
strengthen the SIP. Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the air
quality modeling demonstration as meeting the requirements of the CAA
and EPA guidance. EPA is proposing to disapprove the attainment
demonstration because it does not provide sufficient emissions
reductions from adopted and EPA approved measures to provide for
attainment of the NAAQS. As a result, EPA is also proposing to
disapprove the reasonably available control measures/reasonably
available control technology (RACM/RACT) and reasonable further
progress (RFP) demonstrations and proposing not to grant California's
request to extend to April 5, 2015 the deadline for the South Coast
nonattainment area to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS because
these requirements are linked to approving the attainment demonstration
under the 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule. We are also
proposing to disapprove the assignment of 10 tpd of NOX to
the federal government. Finally, EPA is proposing to disapprove
PM2.5 contingency measures and the motor vehicle emissions
budgets (budgets) for the area's RFP years and attainment year. To the
extent that the State can remedy the shortfall in emissions reductions
for the attainment demonstration, which is the basis for the proposed
disapproval of the attainment demonstration, EPA believes that many of
the noted deficiencies could be addressed.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 21, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0366, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions.
E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov.
Mail or deliver: Marty Robin, Office of Air Planning (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will
be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment.
If EPA cannot read your comments due to technical difficulties and
cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider
your comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California
94105. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the following locations:
California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento,
California 95812, and
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E.
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
The SIP materials are also electronically available at: https://aqmd.gov/aqmp/07aqmp/ and https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4192,
tax.wienke@epa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The PM2.5 NAAQS and the South Coast PM2.5
Nonattainment Area
II. California's State Implementation Plan Submittals to Address
PM2.5 Attainment in the South Coast Nonattainment Area
A. California's SIP Submittals
1. 2007 South Coast AQMP
2. 2007 State Strategy
3. Additional SIP Submittal Related to Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets (Budgets)
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP
Submittals
III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for PM2.5 Attainment
SIPs
IV. Review of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the South Coast Portion
of the Revised 2007 State Strategy
A. Summary of EPA's Proposed Actions
B. Emission Inventories
1. Requirements for Emission Inventories
2. Emission Inventories in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the Emission Inventories
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) and Adopted Control Strategy
1. Requirement for RACM/RACT
2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the SIP
a. District's RACM/RACT Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
b. CARB's RACM Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
c. The Local Jurisdiction's RACM Analysis
3. Proposed Actions on RACM/RACT Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for Attainment Demonstration
2. Air Quality Modeling in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
3. PM2.5 Precursors Addressed in the South Coast 2007
AQMP
4. Extension of the Attainment Date
[[Page 71295]]
5. Attainment Demonstration
a. Enforceable Commitments
i. The Commitments Do Not Represent a Limited Portion of
Required Reductions
ii. The State Is Capable of Fulfilling Its Commitment
iii. The Commitment Is for a Reasonable and Appropriate Period
of Time
b. Federal Reductions
6. Proposed Action on the Attainment Demonstration
E. Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration
1. Requirements for RFP
2. RFP Demonstration in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the RFP Demonstration
F. Contingency Measures
1. Requirements for Contingency Measures
2. Contingency Measures in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
3. Proposed Action on the Contingency Measures
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
H. Mid-Course Review
V. EPA's Proposed Actions
A. EPA's Proposed Approvals and Disapprovals
B. CAA Consequences of a Final Disapproval
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The PM[bdi2].[bdi5] NAAQS and the South Coast
PM[bdi2].[bdi5] Nonattainment Area
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA established new national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5, particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less, including annual
standards of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations, and 24-hour (or daily) standards of 65
[mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. 40 CFR 50.7 EPA established the standards based on
substantial evidence from numerous health studies demonstrating that
serious health effects are associated with exposures to
PM2.5 concentrations above the levels of these standards.
Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature
mortality. Other important health effects associated with
PM2.5 exposure include aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions,
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted
activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory
symptoms, as well as new evidence for more subtle indicators of
cardiovascular health. Individuals particularly sensitive to
PM2.5 exposure include older adults, people with heart and
lung disease, and children. See, EPA, Air Quality Criteria for
Particulate Matter, No. EPA/600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF,
October 2004.
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a
solid or liquid particle (``primary'' or ``direct PM2.5'')
or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of various chemical
reactions from precursor emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
ammonia (NH3) (``secondary PM2.5''). See 72 FR
20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007)
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the United States
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On January 5, 2005, EPA
published initial air quality designations for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, based on air quality monitoring data for three-
year periods of 2001-2003 or 2002-2004. (70 FR 944). These designations
became effective on April 5, 2005.
EPA designated the ``Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin'' area
(South Coast nonattainment area), including Orange County, the
southwestern two-thirds of Los Angeles County, southwestern San
Bernardino County, and western Riverside County as nonattainment for
both the 1997 24-hour and the annual PM2.5 standards. The
South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area is home to about 17
million people, has a diverse economic base, and contains one of the
highest-volume port areas in the world. For a precise description of
the geographic boundaries of the South Coast PM2.5
nonattainment area, See 40 CFR 81.305.\1\ The local air district with
primary responsibility for developing a plan to attain the
PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (District).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On October 17, 2006, EPA strengthened the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the level to 35 [mu]g/m\3\. At
the same time, we retained the level of the annual PM2.5
standard at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. 71 FR 61144. On November 13, 2009, EPA
designated areas, including the South Coast, with respect to the
revised 24-hour NAAQS. 74 FR 58688. California is now required to
submit an attainment plan for the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ standards by
December 14, 2012. In this preamble, all references to the
PM2.5 NAAQS, unless otherwise specified, are to the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 standards of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ and annual
standards of 15 [mu]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambient annual PM2.5 levels in the South Coast are among
the highest recorded in the United States at 18.8 [mu]g/m\3\ for the
2007-2009 period.\2\ In the South Coast, the levels and composition of
PM2.5 differ by geographic location, with higher
PM2.5 concentrations typically occurring in metropolitan Los
Angeles and in the inland valley areas of San Bernardino and
metropolitan Riverside Counties. The higher PM2.5
concentrations in Los Angeles County are mainly due to secondary
formation of particulates. See South Coast 2007 AQMP, pages 2-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) Preliminary Design Value
Report dated August 26, 2010 in the docket for today's action. 18.8
[mu]g/m\3\ is the highest design value in the South Coast
nonattainment area. The design value is the three year average of
annual means of a single monitoring site. (See 40 CFR 50 Appendix N
Section 1(c)(1)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. California's State Implementation Plan Submissions to Address
PM[bdi2].[bdi5] Nonattainment in the South Coast
Nonattainment Area
A. California's SIP Submittals
Designation of an area as nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to EPA a State implementation plan (SIP)
under title 1, part D of the CAA. This SIP must include, among other
things, a demonstration of how the NAAQS will be attained in the
nonattainment area as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than
the date required by the CAA. Under CAA section 172(b), a State has up
to three years after an area's designation to nonattainment to submit
its SIP to EPA. For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, these
nonattainment SIPs were due no later than April 5, 2008.
California has made several SIP submittals to address
PM2.5 nonattainment in the South Coast nonattainment area.
The two principal ones are the District's 2007 PM2.5 Plan
(South Coast 2007 AQMP) and the CARB's State Strategy for California's
2007 State Implementation Plan (2007 State Strategy).
1. 2007 South Coast AQMP
On November 28, 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB or
State) submitted the ``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan, June
2007.'' \3\ This Plan was adopted by the District on June 1, 2007 and
submitted to CARB on October 24, 2007.\4\ The South Coast
[[Page 71296]]
2007 AQMP includes a PM2.5 attainment demonstration for the
South Coast. In order to meet relevant CAA requirements for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, the South Coast 2007 AQMP includes base and
projected year PM2.5 emissions inventories for the South
Coast nonattainment area; air quality monitoring data; short-, medium-
and long-term District control measures; a summary of CARB's control
measures; transportation control measures (TCMs); a demonstration of
RFP; a modeled attainment demonstration; a demonstration of RACM/RACT;
contingency measures for the 1997 PM2.5 RFP and for
attainment for the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area; and
a request to extend the attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS to April 5, 2015.\5\ The South Coast 2007 AQMP submittal also
includes District Governing Board Resolution 07-9 adopting the final
South Coast 2007 AQMP. The South Coast 2007 AQMP also contains
documentation of the District's public process, including written
responses to all public comments received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The South Coast 2007 AQMP is the first South Coast Plan to
address PM2.5. We have previously acted on numerous South
Coast air quality plans for ozone, PM-10, carbon monoxide, and
NO2, such as the 1997/1999 AQMP. We approved the ozone
portion of the 1997 South Coast AQMP, as amended in 1999, on April
10, 2000 (See 65 FR 18903). Our most recent action on a SIP
addressing the CAA requirements for the South Coast ozone
nonattainment area was our partial approval and partial disapproval
of the 2003 AQMP (See 74 FR 10176, March 10, 2009). Because the
District prepares integrated plans that address multiple pollutants,
and also controls VOC and NOX as precursors to
PM2.5, we will refer to control measures and control
measure commitments from the 2003 AQMP further in this notice.
\4\ See November 28, 2007 letter to Wayne Nastri, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9, from James N. Goldstene, Executive
Officer, CARB, with enclosures.
\5\ While the attainment date for PM2.5 areas with a
full five-year extension would be April 5 2015, reductions must be
implemented by 2014 to achieve attainment by that date. See 40 CFR
51.1007(b). We refer, therefore, to 2014 as the ``attainment year''
and April 5, 2015 as the ``attainment date.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 2007 State Strategy
To demonstrate attainment, the South Coast 2007 AQMP relies in part
on measures in the 2007 State Strategy. The 2007 State Strategy was
adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007 and submitted to EPA on November
16, 2007.\6\ It discusses CARB's overall approach to addressing, in
conjunction with local plans, attainment of both the 1997
PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS not only in the South Coast
nonattainment area but also in California's other nonattainment areas
such as the San Joaquin Valley and the Sacramento area. It also
includes CARB's commitments to propose 15 defined State measures\7\ and
to obtain specific amounts of aggregate emissions reductions of direct
PM2.5, NOX, VOC and SOX in the South
Coast from sources under the State's jurisdiction, primarily on- and
off-road motor vehicles and engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See CARB Resolution No. 07-28, September 27, 2007 with
attachments and letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer,
CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9,
November 16, 2007 with enclosures.
\7\ The 2007 State Strategy also includes measures to be
implemented by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair (Smog
Check improvements) and the California Department of Pesticide
Regulation (VOC reductions from pesticide use). See 2007 State
Strategy, p. 64-65 and CARB Resolution 7-28, Attachment B, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted the ``Status Report on the State
Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP) and
Proposed Revision to the SIP Reflecting Implementation of the 2007
State Strategy'', dated March 24, 2009, adopted April 24, 2009 (``2009
State Strategy Status Report''),\8\ which updates the 2007 State
Strategy to reflect its implementation during 2007 and 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See CARB Resolution No. 09-34, April 24, 2009 and letter,
James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB to Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, August 12, 2009 with
enclosures. Only pages 11-27 of the 2009 State Strategy Status
Report are submitted as a SIP revision. The balance of the report is
for informational purposes only. See Attachment A to CARB Resolution
No. 09-34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In today's proposal, we are evaluating only those portions of the
2007 State Strategy as revised in 2009 \9\ that are relevant for
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in the South Coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ We will also refer to the 2007 State Strategy as revised in
2009 as the ``revised 2007 State Strategy.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Additional SIP Submittal Related to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
(Budgets)
In addition to the SIP submittals for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS mentioned above, on April 4, 2008, the District Governing Board
approved an alternative approach for transportation conformity motor
vehicle emission budgets for the South Coast nonattainment area. This
new approach was based on the 2007 SIP baseline emissions reflecting
only the regulations adopted as of October 2006 for all milestone years
up to the attainment years. The CARB Governing Board approved
Resolution 08-27 itemizing the modifications to the South Coast
nonattainment area transportation conformity emission budgets. The
revised PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions budgets were submitted
as an amendment to the California SIP on April 30, 2008. We are acting
on those budgets today.
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require a state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet
this requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that
adequate public notice was given and a public hearing was held
consistent with EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
Both the District and CARB have satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior
to adoption and submittal of the South Coast 2007 AQMP. The District
conducted public workshops, provided public comment periods, and held
public hearings prior to the adoption of the South Coast 2007 AQMP on
June 1, 2007 (District Governing Board Resolution No. 07-9). CARB
provided the required public notice and opportunity for public comment
prior to its September 27, 2007 public hearing on the plan. See CARB
Resolution No. 07-41.
CARB conducted public workshops, provided public comment periods,
and held a public hearing prior to the adoption of the 2007 State
Strategy on September 27, 2007. (CARB Resolution No. 07-28). CARB also
provided the required public notice, opportunity for public comment,
and a public hearing prior to its April 24, 2009 adoption of the 2009
State Strategy Status Report. See CARB Resolution 09-34, April 24,
2009.
The SIP submittals include proof of publication for notices of the
District and CARB public hearings, as evidence that all hearings were
properly noticed. We therefore find that the submittals meet the
procedural requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires EPA to determine whether a SIP
submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section also
provides that any plan that EPA has not affirmatively determined to be
complete or incomplete will become complete 6 months after the date of
submittal by operation of law. EPA's SIP completeness criteria are
found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.
The South Coast 2007 AQMP became complete by operation of law on
May 28, 2008. The November 16, 2007 submission of the 2007 State
Strategy and the 2009 revisions to the Strategy became complete by
operation of law on May 16, 2008 and February 12, 2010, respectively.
III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for PM[bdi2].[bdi5]
Attainment SIPs
EPA is implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS under Title 1, Part
D, subpart 1 of the CAA, which includes section 172, ``Nonattainment
plan provisions.'' Section 172(a)(2) establishes the attainment date
for a PM2.5 nonattainment area ``as expeditiously as
practicable'' but no later than five years after the area's designation
as nonattainment. This section also allows EPA to grant up to a five-
year extension of an area's attainment date based on the severity of
the area's nonattainment and
[[Page 71297]]
the availability and feasibility of controls. EPA designated the South
Coast as a nonattainment area effective April 5, 2005, and thus the
applicable attainment date is no later than April 5, 2010 or, should
EPA grant a full five-year extension, no later than April 5, 2015.
Section 172(c) contains the general statutory planning requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas, including the requirements for
emissions inventories, RACM/RACT, attainment demonstrations, RFP
demonstrations, and contingency measures.
On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 72 FR 20586,
codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z (PM2.5 implementation
rule). The PM2.5 implementation rule and its preamble
address the statutory planning requirements for emissions inventories,
RACM/RACT, attainment demonstrations including air quality modeling
requirements, RFP demonstrations, and contingency measures. This rule
also addresses other matters such as which PM2.5 precursors
must be addressed by the State in its PM2.5 attainment SIP,
applicable attainment dates, and the requirement for mid-course
reviews.\10\ We will discuss each of these CAA and regulatory
requirements for attainment plans in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In June 2007, a petition to the EPA Administrator was filed
on behalf of several public health and environmental groups
requesting reconsideration of four provisions in the
PM2.5 implementation rule. See EarthJustice, Petition for
Reconsideration, ``In the Matter of Final Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule,'' June 25, 2007. These provisions are (1) the
presumption that compliance with the Clean Air Interstate Rule
satisfies the NOX and SO2 RACT requirements
for electric generating units; (2) the deferral of the requirement
to establish emission limits for condensable particulate matter
(CPM) until January 1, 2011; (3) revisions to the criteria for
analyzing the economic feasibility of RACT; and (4) the use of out-
of-area emissions reductions to demonstrate RFP. These provisions
are found in the PM2.5 implementation rule and preamble
at 20623-20628, 40 CFR 51.1002(c), 20619-20620, and 20636,
respectively. On May 13, 2010, EPA granted the petition with respect
to the fourth issue. Letter, Gina McCarthy, EPA, to David Baron and
Paul Cort, Earthjustice, May 13, 2010. EPA is currently considering
the other issues raised in the petition.
Neither the District nor the State relied on the first, third,
or fourth of these provisions in preparing the South Coast 2007 AQMP
or 2007 State Strategy. The District has deferred CPM limits in its
rules. EPA does not believe that this deferral adversely affects the
Plan's RACT or expeditious attainment demonstrations. See section
II.D.3 of the TSD for this proposal. EPA will evaluate any rule
adopted or revised by the District after January 1, 2011 to assure
that it appropriately addresses CPM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Review of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the South Coast Portion of
the 2007 State Strategy
A. Summary of EPA's Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part those
portions of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and those portions of the 2007
State Strategy as revised in 2009 specific to the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in the South Coast. We are proposing to approve the base year and
baseline emissions inventories in these SIP revisions as meeting the
applicable requirements of the CAA and the PM2.5
implementation rule. We are also proposing to approve the District's
and CARB's commitments to propose specific measures and to meet
specific aggregate emissions reductions in these revisions as
strengthening the SIP, as well as the District's air quality modeling
demonstration as meeting the applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA
guidance.
We are proposing to disapprove the attainment demonstration, RACM/
RACT analysis, RFP demonstration, and California's request to extend
the attainment date to 2015 as not meeting the applicable requirements
of the CAA and the PM2.5 implementation rule because they
are dependent on the approval of the attainment demonstration (See 40
CFR 51.1009 and 51.1010). For the attainment demonstration, we are
proposing to approve the air quality modeling, but we are proposing to
disapprove the overall demonstration because it relies too extensively
on commitments to emissions reductions in lieu of fully adopted and
submitted rules. Rules that have either not been adopted in final form
or have not been submitted to EPA cannot be credited toward the
attainment demonstration. We are proposing to disapprove the motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the RFP milestone years and the
attainment year, because they are derived from RFP and attainment
demonstrations which we are proposing to disapprove. Finally, we are
proposing to disapprove the RFP and attainment contingency measures as
not meeting the applicable requirements of the CAA and the
PM2.5 implementation rule. To the extent that the State can
remedy the shortfall in emissions reductions for the attainment
demonstration, which is the basis for the proposed disapproval of the
attainment demonstration, EPA believes that many of the noted
deficiencies could be addressed.
EPA's analysis and findings are summarized below and are described
in more detail in the technical support document (TSD) for this
proposal, which is available on line at https://www.regulations.gov in
the docket for this proposal (EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0366), or from the EPA
contact listed at the beginning of this notice.
B. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a ``comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant.'' The PM2.5 implementation rule requires
states to include direct PM2.5 emissions and emissions of
all PM2.5 precursors in this inventory, even if it has
determined that control of any of these precursors is not necessary for
expeditious attainment. 40 CFR Sec. 51.1008(a)(2) and 72 FR 20586, at
20648. Direct PM2.5 includes condensable particulate matter.
See 40 CFR 51.1000. PM2.5 precursors are NOX,
SO2, VOC, and ammonia (NH3).\11\ Id. The
inventories should meet the data requirements of EPA's Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (codified at 40 CFR part 51 subpart A) and
include any additional inventory information needed to support the
SIP's attainment demonstration and (where applicable) RFP
demonstration. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The District controls sulfur oxides (SOX), which
includes SO2, and considers the two terms interchangeable
for emissions purposes. We will use SOX in this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A baseline emission inventory is required for the attainment
demonstration and for meeting RFP requirements. As determined on the
date of designation, the base year for this inventory should be the
most recent calendar year for which a complete inventory was required
to be submitted to EPA. The baseline emission inventory for calendar
year 2002 or other suitable year should be used for attainment planning
and RFP plans for areas initially designated nonattainment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS in 2005. 40 CFR 51.1008(b).
EPA has provided additional guidance for PM2.5 emission
inventories in ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze Regulations,''
November 2005 (EPA-454/R-05-001).
2. Emissions Inventories in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
The baseline planning inventories for direct PM2.5 and
all PM2.5 precursors for the South Coast nonattainment area
together with additional documentation for the inventories are found in
[[Page 71298]]
Appendix III of the South Coast 2007 AQMP. Average annual day baseline
inventories are provided for the years 2002, 2005 (the reference year
for the air quality modeling) and for the years 2008, 2010, 2011, and
2014. The baseline inventories incorporate reductions from federal,
state, and District measures adopted prior to 2007 (``baseline
measures''). South Coast 2007 AQMP, page 3-1. The District also
provided both summer and winter planning inventories for
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. South Coast 2007
AQMP, Appendix III, page III-1-23.
Table 1 is a summary of the average annual day inventories for
directly-emitted PM2.5 and for the PM2.5
precursors NOX, VOC, and SOX for the baseline
modeling year of 2005 and the targeted attainment year of 2014 from the
South Coast 2007 AQMP (derived from Appendix A, Table A-2). It is these
inventories that provide the basis for the control measure analysis and
the RFP and attainment demonstrations in the South Coast 2007 AQMP.
Table 1--South Coast Nonattainment Area Emissions Inventory Summary for PM[ihel2].[ihel5] and PM[ihel2].[ihel5]
Precursors for the 2005 Baseline Year and 2014 Attainment Year
[Annual average day emissions in tons per day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC PM2.5 SOX NH3
Emissions inventory category -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 2014 2005 2014 2005 2014 2005 2014 2005 2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary/Areawide Sources..... 87 71 259 260 58 63 22 17 75 68
On-road Mobile Sources.......... 526 287 264 159 20 17 4 2 29 15
Off-road Mobile Sources......... 360 293 208 157 22 18 37 25 n/a n/a
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 972 650 731 566 101 98 63 45 104 83
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Numbers may not add due to rounding.
As a starting point for the South Coast 2007 AQMP's inventories,
the District used CARB's 2002 base year inventory. An example of this
inventory and CARB's documentation for its inventories can be found in
Appendices A and F, respectively, of the 2007 State Strategy. The 2002
inventory for the South Coast nonattainment area was projected to 2005
and future years using CARB's California Emission Forecasting and
Planning Inventory System (CEFIS). South Coast 2007 AQMP, Appendix III,
page III-1-1. Both base year and baseline inventories use the current
version of California's mobile source emissions model approved by EPA
for use in SIPs, EMFAC2007 V2.3, for estimating on-road motor vehicle
emissions. 73 FR 3464 (January 18, 2008). Off-road inventories were
developed using the CARB off-road model. Ammonia emissions estimates
were provided separately by the District.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Electronic mail from Kathy Hsiao, SCAQMD to Wienke Tax, EPA
Region 9, RE: NH3 numbers for SCAB, dated October 29, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Proposed Action on the Emission Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions inventories in the South Coast 2007
AQMP and the inventory methodologies used by the District and CARB for
consistency with CAA requirements, the PM2.5 implementation
rule, and EPA's guidance. We find that the base year and projected
baseline year inventories are comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventories of actual or projected emissions of PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors in the South Coast nonattainment area as of
the date of their submittal. We therefore propose to approve these
inventories as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), the
PM2.5 implementation rule and applicable EPA guidance. We
provide more detail on our review of the inventories in section II.A.
of the TSD for this proposal.
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) and Adopted Control Strategy
1. Requirements for RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan ``provide
for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions
from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the
adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology),
and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air
quality standards.'' EPA defines RACM as measures that a State finds
are both reasonably available and contribute to attainment as
expeditiously as practicable in its nonattainment area. Thus, what
constitutes RACM/RACT in a PM2.5 attainment plan is closely
tied to that plan's expeditious attainment demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1010; 72 FR 20586 at 20612. States are required to evaluate RACM/
RACT for direct PM2.5 and all of its attainment plan
precursors. 40 CFR 51.1002(c).
For PM2.5 attainment plans, EPA is requiring a combined
approach to RACM and RACT under subpart 1 of Part D of the CAA. Subpart
1, unlike subparts 2 and 4, does not identify specific source
categories for which EPA must issue control technology documents or
guidelines, or identify specific source categories for State and EPA
evaluation during attainment plan development. 72 FR 20586, at 20610.
Rather, under subpart 1, EPA considers RACT to be part of an area's
overall RACM obligation. Because of the variable nature of the
PM2.5 problem in different nonattainment areas, which may
require States to develop attainment plans that address widely
disparate circumstances, EPA determined that states should have
flexibility with respect to RACT and RACM controls but also that in
areas needing significant emission reductions to attain the standards,
RACT/RACM controls on smaller sources may be necessary to reach
attainment as expeditiously as practicable. 72 FR 20586, at 20612,
20615. Thus, under the PM2.5 implementation rule, RACT and
RACM are those reasonably available measures that contribute to
attainment as expeditiously as practicable in the specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 FR 20586, at 20612.
Specifically, the PM2.5 implementation rule requires that
attainment plans include the list of measures the state considered and
information sufficient to show that a state met all requirements for
the determination of what constitutes RACM/RACT in the specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010(a). In addition, the rule requires
that the state, in determining whether a particular emissions reduction
measure or set of measures must be adopted as
[[Page 71299]]
RACM/RACT, consider the cumulative impact of implementing the available
measures and adopt as RACM/RACT any potential measures that are
reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility
if, considered collectively, they would advance the attainment date by
one year or more. Any measures that are necessary to meet these
requirements that are not already either federally promulgated, part of
the state's SIP, or otherwise creditable in SIPs must be submitted in
enforceable form as part of a state's attainment plan for the area. 72
FR 20586, at 20614.
A more comprehensive discussion of the RACM/RACT requirement for
PM2.5 attainment plans and EPA's guidance for it can be
found in the PM2.5 implementation rule preamble at 20609-
20633 and in section II.D. of the TSD for this proposal.
2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the SIP
CARB and the District have rulemaking processes for development,
adoption and implementation of RACM/RACT that have been in place for
decades. Many of the measures being implemented in California and the
South Coast nonattainment area are the most stringent in the nation and
are often adopted for implementation in other areas. In addition, the
State and District have adopted new measures since 2002, the base year
for the South Coast 2007 AQMP, and included enforceable commitments for
measures that are scheduled to be adopted in the future. The RACM/RACT
analysis for the South Coast 2007 AQMP includes an evaluation of the
State's, District's, and the Southern California Association of
Governments' (SCAG's) new stationary, area and mobile sources measures
that have been adopted since the base year and those that are being
committed to for adoption in the future. See CARB Staff Report,
``Proposed 2007 State Implementation Plan for the South Coast Air
Basin--PM2.5 Annual Average and 8-Hour ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (September 21, 2007); South Coast 2007
AQMP, Appendix VI; and 2007 State Strategy, Appendix G. A more detailed
discussion of the District, State and SCAG measures is provided below.
a. District's RACM/RACT Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
The District's RACM/RACT analysis, which focuses on stationary and
area source controls, is described in Chapter 6 and Appendix VI of the
South Coast 2007 AQMP.
Since the 1970s, the District has adopted stationary source control
rules that have resulted in significant improvement of air quality in
the South Coast nonattainment area. When command and control rules were
no longer within the limitations of economic efficiency, the District
began using economic incentive approaches with programs such as the
Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) and the Carl Moyer
program.\13\ While the District still relies on command and control
regulations, the District's control strategies are now supplemented by
market incentive and compliance flexibility approaches where
appropriate. These regulations and strategies have yielded significant
emissions reductions from sources under the District's jurisdiction. In
developing the South Coast 2007 AQMP, the District conducted a process
to identify RACM for the South Coast that involved public meetings to
solicit input, evaluation of EPA suggested RACM and RACT, and
evaluation of other air agencies' regulations. See South Coast 2007
AQMP, Appendix VI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment
Program (``Carl Moyer Program'') provides incentive grants for
engines, equipment and other sources of pollution that are cleaner
than required, providing early or extra emission reductions.
Eligible projects include cleaner on-road, off-road, marine,
locomotive and stationary agricultural pump engines. The program
achieves near-term reductions in emissions of NOX, PM,
and VOC or reactive organic gas (ROG) which are necessary for
California to meet its clean air commitments under the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine which measures would be feasible for the South Coast,
the District looked at measures implemented in other nonattainment
areas' plans (including the San Joaquin Valley, the San Francisco Bay
Area, Sacramento, Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth, the Houston-Galveston
area, and by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, or LADCO), and
held meetings with CARB, technical experts, local government
representatives, and the public during development of the South Coast
2007 AQMP. The District sponsored an AQMP summit, which generated 200
potential control measures. In addition, the District reviewed the list
of control measures in EPA's PM2.5 implementation rule. The
District also reevaluated all 82 District rules and regulations. The
District then screened the identified measures and rejected those that
affected few or no sources in the South Coast, had already been adopted
as rules, or were in the process of being adopted. The remaining
measures were evaluated using baseline inventories, available control
technologies, and potential emission reductions as well as whether the
measure could be implemented on a schedule that would contribute to
attainment of the PM2.5 standard assuming a 2015 deadline.
South Coast 2007 AQMP, Appendix VI.
In general, EPA believes that the District's current rules and
regulations are equivalent to or more stringent with respect to
emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors than
those developed by other air districts, with a few exceptions where
improvements are possible. The District is exploring several options
for reducing emissions further. These include the feasibility of
lowering emission limits and increasing levels of control in order to
promote cleaner stationary source technologies; lowering the VOC
content of coatings and solvents; establishing standards and test
methods for generic equipment and lowering release or leak thresholds;
improving leak detection, repair, inspection and maintenance; and
adding best management practices to rules.
Based on its RACM/RACT evaluation for stationary and area sources
under its jurisdiction, the District developed 37 stationary source
control measures that contained all measures included in other
districts' AQMPs, as well as some new innovative measures. The District
determined that the few available measures that District staff did not
include would not advance the attainment date or contribute to RFP due
to the insignificant or unquantifiable emissions reductions they would
potentially generate. Since submittal of the AQMP in 2007, the District
has completed action on the majority of these rules and submitted them
to EPA for approval into the SIP.
From October 2002 through June 2006, the District adopted
approximately 17 rules to address its commitment to achieve the
reductions committed to in the 2003 AQMP for the South Coast. These
rules included controls on VOC emissions from refineries and chemical
plants, co-composting operations, architectural coatings, solvent
cleaning operations, oil and gas production wells, and livestock waste.
Many of the adopted rules achieved more estimated reductions in VOC,
NOX and SOX than were expected in the 2003 AQMP.
A summary of these rules, which are included in the baseline emissions
estimates for the South Coast 2007 AQMP, is provided in Table 1-2 of
the South Coast 2007 AQMP. See South Coast 2007 AQMP, Chapter 1, Table
1-2 and Chapter 4, page 4-6, and Table B-1 in Appendix B of the TSD for
today's action.
[[Page 71300]]
In addition to the rules adopted for 2003 AQMP, the District has
also made new commitments in its South Coast 2007 AQMP to achieve
further reductions from VOC, NOX, SOX and direct
PM2.5 sources in the South Coast Area. The District
committed to adopt and submit measures that will achieve the following
additional emissions reductions: 32 tpd NOX, 10 tpd VOC, 4
tpd direct PM2.5 and 3 tpd SOX.\14\ See CARB
Staff Report on the South Coast 2007 AQMP, page ES-2 to ES-4. The
District expects to meet its emissions reductions commitments for each
of the pollutants by adopting new control measures and programs found
in the Table 4-2A of the South Coast 2007 AQMP (See South Coast 2007
AQMP, page 4-10 and CARB Staff Report on South Coast 2007 AQMP, p. 18)
and from additional actions summarized in the CARB Staff Report on the
South Coast 2007 AQMP (See CARB Staff Report on South Coast 2007 AQMP,
p. 17). The new control measures and additional actions are estimated
to achieve more of the District's NOX and VOC emission
reduction commitments. They include new rules to regulate lubricants,
consumer products, non-RECLAIM ovens, dryers and furnaces, space
heaters, facility modernizations, livestock waste, residential wood
burning, commercial cooking, and continuation of the Carl Moyer
program. The South Coast 2007 AQMP also identifies 22 measures (beyond
the new control measures and additional actions just discussed) for
further review which may also yield additional reductions towards the
District's commitments. As discussed above, the District's commitment
is to achieve the estimated total tonnage reductions of each pollutant
because specific control measures and actions as adopted may provide
more or less reductions than estimated in the South Coast 2007 AQMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ CARB uses the term ROG (reactive organic gases) where we
use the term VOC. We will use the term ``VOC'' in this notice to
refer to both ROG and VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, EPA notes that since the adoption of the South Coast 2007
AQMP, the District has already adopted and submitted several new rules
that help fulfill the District's enforceable commitments for additional
emission reductions of NOX, VOC, direct PM2.5 and
SOX in the South Coast area. Tables 2 and 3 below summarize
the status of these new rules.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 71301]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22NO10.021
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
Table 3--Submittal and Approval Status of District Rules in the 2007 PM[ihel2].[ihel5] Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 445--Woodburning fireplaces and SIP-approved........... 74 FR 27716, 6/11/09.
wood stoves.
Rule 1144--Vanishing oils and rust SIP-approved........... 75 FR 40726, 07/14/10.
inhibitors.
Rule 1143--Consumer Paint Thinners Not yet submitted-- New rule; no previous version approved into the
and Multi-Purpose Solvents. adopted 07/09/10. SIP; District is revising rule.
Rule 1145--Plastic, Rubber, Leather SIP-approved........... 75 FR 40726, 07/14/10.
and Glass Coatings.
Rule 1147--NOX reductions from SIP-approved........... 75 FR 46845, 08/04/10.
miscellaneous sources.
Rule 2002--Further SOX reductions Not yet adopted........ Most recent approval 08/29/06, 71 FR 51120.
from RECLAIM.
Rule 1111--Further NOX reductions SIP-approved........... 75 FR 46845, 08/04/10.
from space heaters.
Rule 1110.2--Liquid and gaseous SIP-approved........... 74 FR 18995, 4/27/09.
fuels--stationary ICEs.
Rule 1146--NOX from industrial, Submitted.............. Most recent approval--04/08/02, 67 FR 16640.
institutional, commercial boilers,
steam generators, and process
heaters.
Rule 1146.1--NOX from small Submitted.............. Most recent approval--09/06/95, 60 FR 46220.
industrial, institutional,
commercial boilers, steam
generators, and process heaters.
Rule 1127--Livestock Waste........... Submitted to EPA on 10/ Found complete on 10/25/06.
05/06.
Refinery Pilot Program............... Not yet adopted........ N/A.
[[Page 71302]]
Rule 2301--Indirect Source Review.... Not yet adopted........ N/A.
Carl Moyer program................... No rule associated with Ongoing.
this measure.
AB923 Light duty vehicle high emitter No rule associated with N/A.
program. this measure.
AB923 Light duty vehicle high emitter No rule associated with N/A.
program. this measure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. CARB's RACM Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
Source categories for which CARB has primary responsibility for
reducing emissions in California include most new and existing on- and
off-road engines and vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer
products. In addition, California has unique authority under CAA
section 209 (subject to a waiver by EPA) to adopt and implement new
emission standards for many categories of on-road vehicles and engines,
and new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines.
Given the need for significant emissions reductions from mobile and
area sources to meet the NAAQS in California nonattainment areas, the
State of California has been a leader in the development of some of the
most stringent control measures nationwide for on-road and off-road
mobile sources and the fuels that power them. These standards have
reduced new car emissions by 99 percent and new truck emissions by 90
percent from uncontrolled levels. 2007 State Strategy, p. 37. The State
is also working with EPA on goods movement activities and is
implementing programs to reduce emissions from ship auxiliary engines,
locomotives, harbor craft and new cargo handling equipment. In
addition, the State has standards for lawn and garden equipment,
recreational vehicles and boats, and other off-road sources that
require newly manufactured equipment to be 80-98% cleaner than their
uncontrolled counterparts. Id. Finally, the State has adopted many
measures that focus on achieving reductions from in-use mobile sources
that include more stringent inspection and maintenance (I/M) or ``Smog
Check'' requirements, truck and bus idling restrictions, and various
incentive programs. Since 1994 alone, the State has taken more than 45
rulemaking actions and achieved most of the emissions reductions needed
for attainment in the State's nonattainment areas. See 2007 State
Strategy, pp. 36-40. As is noted in the 2007 State Strategy, EPA has
approved California's mobile source program as representing best
available control measures. See 2007 State Strategy, Appendix G, 69 FR
5412 (February 4, 2004), 69 FR 30006 (May 26, 2004) (proposed and final
approval of San Joaquin Valley PM10 plan).
CARB developed its proposed 2007 State Strategy after an extensive
public consultation process to identify potential SIP measures.\15\
From this process, CARB identified and committed to propose 15 new
defined measures. These measures focus on cleaning up the in-use fleet
as well as increasing the stringency of emissions standards for a
number of engine categories, fuels, and consumer products. Many, if not
most, of these measures are being proposed for adoption for the first
time anywhere in the nation. They build on CARB's already comprehensive
program described above that addresses emissions from all types of
mobile sources and consumer products, through both regulations and
incentive programs. See Appendix A of the TSD. Table 4 below lists the
new defined measures in the 2007 State Strategy that include one
measure each from the California Bureau of Automotive Repair and the
California Department of Pesticide Regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ More information on this public process including
presentations from the workshops and symposium that proceeded the
adoption of the 2007 State Strategy can be found at https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm.
Table 4--2007 State Strategy Defined Measures Scheduled for Consideration and Current Status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary area (SC and/or
Defined state measure SJV) Adoption year Current status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smog Check Improvements............... Both..................... 2007-2008............... Elements approved 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010).
Expanded Vehicle Retirement........... Both..................... 2008-2014............... Adopted CARB June 2009; Bureau of Automotive Repair
September 2010.
Revisions to Reformulated Gasoline Both..................... 2007.................... Approved, See 75 FR 26653 (May 2, 2010).
Program.
Cleaner In-use Heavy Duty Trucks...... Both..................... 2008.................... Adopted 2008, pending revisions.
Auxiliary Ship Cold Ironing and Other SC....................... 2007-2008............... Adopted December 2007.
Clean Technologies.
Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuels... SC....................... Fuel: 2007, Engines: Adopted July 2007.
2009.
Port Truck Modernization.............. SC....................... 2007-2008............... Adopted December 2007 and December 2008.
Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Both..................... 2007-2008............... In progress.
Locomotives.
Clean Up Existing Harbor Crafts....... SC....................... 2007.................... Adopted November 2007, revised June 2010.
Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Engines....... Both..................... 2007.................... Adopted 2007, pending revisions.
Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment. SJV...................... 2009.................... In progress using incentive funds.
New Emissions Standards for Both..................... 2009-2010............... Partial adoption, 2008; additional regulation in public
Recreational Boats. review.
[[Page 71303]]
Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Both..................... By 2010................. Adopted November 2008.
Emissions Standards.
Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Both..................... 2007.................... Adopted June 2007.
Ground Storage Tanks.
Additional Evaporative Emissions Both..................... By 2010................. Partial adoption, 2008.
Standards.
Consumer Products Program (I & II).... Both..................... 2008 & 2010-2012........ Phase I--Approved 74 FR 57074 (November 4, 2009).
Department of Pesticide Regulation.... SJV...................... 2008.................... Adopted 2008, amended 2009.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SC = South Coast nonattainment area; SJV = San Joaquin Valley. Source: 2009 State Strategy Status Report, p. 23 (footnotes in original not included).
Appendix A of the TSD includes a list of all measures adopted by
CARB between 1990 and the beginning of 2007. These measures, reductions
from which are reflected in the South Coast 2007 AQMP's baseline
inventories, fall into two categories: Measures that are subject to a
waiver of Federal preemption under CAA section 209 (``section 209
waiver measures'' or ``waiver measures'') and those for which the State
is not required to obtain a waiver (``non-waiver measures''). Emissions
reductions from waiver measures are fully creditable in attainment and
RFP demonstrations and may be used to meet other CAA requirements, such
as contingency measures. See EPA's proposed approval of the San Joaquin
Valley 1-hour ozone plan at 74 FR 33933, 33938 (July 14, 2009) and
final approval at 75 FR 10420 (March 8, 2010). The State's baseline
non-waiver measures have generally all been approved by EPA into the
SIP and as such are fully creditable for meeting CAA requirements.
In addition to the State's commitments to propose defined new
measures, the 2007 State Strategy includes enforceable commitments for
direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, and SOX
emissions reductions from mobile source categories that are that are
crucial for attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast
nonattainment area. For the South Coast nonattainment area, the revised
2007 State Strategy includes State commitments to achieve 152 tpd of
NOX, 46 tpd of VOC, 9 tpd of direct PM2.5, and 20
tpd of SOX (See 2007 State Strategy, p. 63 and CARB
Resolution 07-28, Attachment B, p. 6). The 2007 State Strategy
indicates that the State expects to achieve these emission reductions
in the South Coast nonattainment area by the projected attainment year
of 2014 from the measures listed in Table 4 or other similar measures.
In the 2007 State Strategy, CARB provides an estimated emissions
reduction for each measure to show that, when considered together,
these measures can meet the total commitment. CARB states, however,
that its enforceable commitment is to achieve the aggregate emissions
reductions for each pollutant by the given dates and not for a specific
level of reductions from any specific measure. See 2007 State Strategy,
p. 58. A summary of the estimates from the proposed measures is
provided in Table 5 below.
As mentioned above, CARB's commitment is also to propose specific
new measures that are identified and defined in the 2007 Strategy
State. See 2007 State Strategy, pp. 64-65 and 2009 State Strategy
revisions, pp. 22-23. Table 5 below lists these defined measures. As
shown in this table, the State has adopted many of the measures.
Table 5--Expected Emissions Reductions from Defined Measures in the 2007 State Strategy for the South Coast
(2014 Tons per Day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 Direct
Measure 2014 NOX 2014 VOC PM2.5 2014 SOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smog Check Improvements (BAR) [partial]......... 2.0 4.1 .............. ..............
Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program.. .............. 4.4 .............. ..............
Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks................ 59.7 5.0
