Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California; PM10, 44494-44511 [2013-17825]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
44494
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
the Wheeling Area under subpart 4.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve
the NH3 and VOC emissions inventories
submitted by the State, in conjunction
with the NOx, direct PM2.5, and SO2
emissions inventories that EPA
previously proposed to approve as fully
meeting the comprehensive inventory
requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA for the Wheeling Area for the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard. See (77 FR 7357,
December 11, 2012). Since EPA’s prior
proposal addressed other precursor
emissions inventories, EPA in this
supplemental proposal is seeking
comment only with respect to the
additional inventories for NH3 and VOC
that West Virginia has submitted.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
IV. Proposed Action
After fully considering the D.C.
Circuit Court’s decision in NRDC v. EPA
on EPA’s 1997 PM2.5 Implementation
rule, EPA in this supplemental notice is
proposing to proceed with approval of
the request to redesignate the Wheeling
Area to attainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and the associated
maintenance plan. EPA in this
supplemental notice is also proposing to
approve the 2008 NH3 and VOC
emissions inventory as meeting, in
conjunction with the direct PM2.5, NOX
and SO2 emissions inventory that EPA
previously proposed to approve, the
comprehensive emissions inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA. In addition, EPA in this
supplemental action is proposing to
proceed with the approval of the
insignificance determination of the
onroad motor vehicle contribution of
PM2.5, NOX and SO2. EPA is seeking
comment only on the issues raised in its
supplemental proposal, and is not reopening comment on other issues
addressed in its prior proposal.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide 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
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule
pertaining to the redesignation of the
West Virginia portion of the Wheeling
WV–OH 1997 annual PM2.5
nonattainment area, does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 52 and
81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 8, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013–17704 Filed 7–23–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0877; FRL–9837–6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Designation of
Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; State of California; PM10;
Redesignation of Sacramento to
Attainment; Approval of PM10
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for Sacramento
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve,
as a revision of the California state
implementation plan, the State’s request
to redesignate the Sacramento
nonattainment area to attainment for the
24-hour particulate matter of ten
microns or less (PM10) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). EPA is also proposing to
approve the PM10 maintenance plan and
the associated motor vehicle emissions
budgets for use in transportation
conformity determinations necessary for
the Sacramento area. Finally, EPA is
proposing to approve the attainment
year emissions inventory. EPA is
proposing these actions because the SIP
revision meets the requirements of the
Clean Air Act and EPA guidance for
such plans and motor vehicle emissions
budgets.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R09–OAR–2012–0877, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: John Ungvarsky
(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation.
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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or email.
https://www.regulations.gov 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
email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment 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 and
documents in the docket for this action
are generally available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office (AIR–2),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, (415) 972–3963,
ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action
II. Background
A. The PM10 NAAQS
B. PM10 Planning Requirements
III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption
and Submittal of SIP Revisions
IV. Substantive Requirements for
Redesignation
V. Evaluation of the State’s Redesignation
Request for the Sacramento PM10
Nonattainment Area
A. Determination That the Area Has
Attained the PM10 NAAQS.
B. The Area Must Have a Fully-Approved
SIP Meeting Requirements Applicable
for Purposes of Redesignation Under
Clean Air Act Section 110 and Part D
1. Basic SIP Requirements under Section
110
2. SIP Requirements under Part D
C. EPA Has Determined That the
Improvement in Air Quality is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
in Emissions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Under Clean Air Act
Section 175A
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
44495
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Verification of Continued Attainment
4. Contingency Provisions
5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
6. Transportation Conformity and Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets
VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public
Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
section 175A. Finally, EPA is proposing
to approve the attainment year
emissions inventory under CAA section
172(c)(3).
EPA is proposing these actions
because the SIP revision meets the
requirements of the CAA and EPA
guidance for such plans and budgets.
I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action
A. The PM10 NAAQS
Under Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘the
Act’’) section 107(d)(3)(D), EPA is
proposing to approve the State’s request
to redesignate the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment for the
24-hour PM10 National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS or
‘‘standard’’). We are doing so based on
our conclusion that the area has met the
five criteria for redesignation under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E): (1) That the
area has attained the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS in the 2010–2012 time period
and that the area continues to attain the
PM10 standard since that time; (2) that
relevant portions of the California state
implementation plan (SIP) are fully
approved; (3) that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions; (4)
that California has met all requirements
applicable to the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area with respect to
section 110 and part D of the CAA; and
(5) that the PM10 Implementation/
Maintenance Plan and Redesignation
Request for Sacramento County
(October 28, 2010) (‘‘Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’) 1 meets
the requirements of section 175A of the
CAA.
In addition, under CAA section
110(k)(3), EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan including the
motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) in the 2008 Sacramento PM10
Plan as a revision to the California SIP
because we find the MVEBs meet the
applicable transportation conformity
requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e).
EPA finds that the maintenance
demonstration shows how the area will
continue to attain the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS for at least 10 years beyond
redesignation (i.e., through 2023) and
that the contingency provisions
describing the actions that the
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD) will
take in the event of a future monitored
violation meet all applicable
requirements for maintenance plans and
related contingency provisions in CAA
EPA sets the NAAQS for certain
ambient air pollutants at levels required
to protect public health and welfare.
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal
ten micrometers, or PM10, is one of these
ambient air pollutants for which EPA
has established health-based standards.
EPA revised the NAAQS for
particulate matter on July 1, 1987 (52 FR
24633), replacing standards for total
suspended particulates (TSP less than
30 microns in diameter) with new
standards applying only to particulate
matter up to 10 microns in diameter
(PM10). At that time, EPA established
two PM10 standards, an annual standard
and a 24-hour standard.
In an October 17, 2006 p.m. NAAQS
revision, the 24-hour PM10 standards
were retained but the annual standards
were revoked effective December 18,
2006. 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
On January 15, 2013, EPA announced
that it was again retaining the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS as a 24-hour standard of
150 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/
m3). See 78 FR 3086. This SIP submittal
addresses the 24-hour PM10 standard as
originally promulgated in 1987 and
reaffirmed on January 15, 2013. An area
attains the 24-hour PM10 standard of 150
micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3)
when the expected number of days per
calendar year with a 24-hour
concentration in excess of the standard
(referred to as an exceedance), is equal
to or less than one.2
1 See letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive
Officer, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9, dated December 7,
2010, with attachments.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
II. Background
B. PM10 Planning Requirements
Effective January 20, 1994, EPA
designated Sacramento County as a
moderate nonattainment area for the
PM10 NAAQS. See 58 FR 67334
(December, 21, 1993). The designation,
classification, and boundaries of the
Sacramento nonattainment area are
codified at 40 CFR 81.305.
2 An exceedance is defined as a daily value that
is above the level of the 24-hour standard, 150 mg/
m3, after rounding to the nearest 10 mg/m3 (i.e.,
values ending in five or greater are to be rounded
up). Thus, a recorded value of 154 mg/m3 would not
be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 150
mg/m3; whereas, a recorded value of 155 mg/m3
would be an exceedance since it would be rounded
to 160 mg/m3. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K,
section 1.0.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
44496
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Beginning in the 1970’s and
continuing to the present, the
SMAQMD 3 and CARB have adopted a
number of rules and prepared a number
of nonattainment plans to address
planning requirements under the CAA,
as amended in 1977. CARB submitted
these rules and plans to EPA at various
times, and EPA approved a number of
them into the California SIP. Examples
of rules adopted by SMAQMD and
approved by EPA as revisions to the
California SIP as part of the PM10
control strategy in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area include: Rule 403—
Fugitive Dust; Rule 405—Dust and
Condensed Fumes; Rule 412—
Stationary Source Internal Combustion
Engines at Major Stationary Sources of
NOX; and Rule 414—Natural Gas Fired
Water Heaters. Examples of rules
adopted by CARB and approved by EPA
as revisions to the California SIP that
have reduced PM10 in the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area include:
California Code of Regulations (CCR)
Title 13, Section 1956.8—Heavy Duty
Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards;
CCR, Section 2262—California
Reformulated Gasoline Phase 2 and
Phase 3 Standards; and CCR, Sections
2420–2427—Heavy Duty Diesel Cycle
Engines.
On February 15, 2002, EPA
determined under section 179(c) of the
CAA that the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area had attained the 24hour PM10 NAAQS by its December 31,
2000 attainment date, based on
complete, quality-assured, and certified
ambient air monitoring data that
showed the area monitored attainment
of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for 1998–
2000. (67 FR 7082). Because EPA
determined that the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area met its attainment
date, no PM10 serious nonattainment
area requirements apply in the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area. In
this action, we are updating the
determination of attainment to account
for PM10 monitoring data since 2001,
including more recent years consistent
with the applicable criterion for
redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(i).
On December 7, 2010, CARB
submitted the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan and requested that
EPA redesignate the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment for the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS. We are
proposing action today on CARB’s
December 7, 2010 submittal, including
3 In 1990, the Sacramento County Air Pollution
Control District changed its name to the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
and redesignation request.
III. Procedural Requirements for
Adoption and Submittal of SIP
Revisions
Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(l) of the
Act require states to provide reasonable
notice and public hearing prior to
adoption of SIP revisions. In this action,
we are proposing action on CARB’s
December 7, 2010 submittal of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan,
dated October 28, 2010, as a revision to
the California SIP. The submittal
documents the public review process
followed by SMAQMD and CARB in
adopting the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan prior to submittal to
EPA as a revision to the California SIP.
The documentation provides evidence
that reasonable notice of a public
hearing was provided to the public and
that a public hearing was conducted
prior to adoption.
CARB’s submittal includes a letter
dated October 28, 2010 from Larry
Greene, Executive Director/Air
Pollution Control Officer to the Board of
Directors for the SMAQMD. In addition,
Enclosure 1, Attachment 3 of CARB’s
submittal includes a copy of the notice
to the public published on September
27, 2010, announcing a public hearing
to be held on October 28, 2010. These
materials document the public review
process followed by SMAQMD in
adopting the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan prior to transmittal to
CARB and provide evidence that
reasonable notice of a public hearing
was provided to the public and that a
public hearing was conducted prior to
adoption. Specifically, the notice for the
Board hearing was published in the
Sacramento Bee, a newspaper of general
circulation, on September 27, 2010 and
sent to over 2000 email addresses. The
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan was
also made available for viewing on the
District’s Web site and at the District
office on and after September 27, 2010.
Enclosure I, Attachment 1 of CARB’s
submittal documents the adoption of the
Sacramento PM10 Plan by the SMAQMD
Board of Directors. On October 28, 2010,
the SMAQMD Board of Directors
approved the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan and directed
SMAQMD staff to forward the Plan to
CARB, the Governor of California’s
designee for SIP matters.
Enclosure IV of CARB’s submittal
documents CARB’s board resolution
regarding the Sacramento PM10 Plan. On
December 7, 2010, CARB submitted the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan to
EPA for approval as a revision to the
California SIP.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Based on the documentation included
in CARB’s submittal, we find that the
submittal of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan as a SIP revision
satisfies the procedural requirements of
sections 110(l) of the Act for revising
SIPs.
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 we have not affirmatively
determined to be complete or
incomplete will become complete six
months after the day of submittal by
operation of law. A completeness
review allows us to determine if the
submittal includes all the necessary
items and information we need to act on
it.
We make completeness
determinations using criteria we have
established in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix
V. These criteria fall into two categories:
administrative information and
technical support information. The
administrative information provides
documentation that the State has
followed basic administrative
procedures during the SIP-adoption
process and thus we have a legallyadopted SIP revision in front of us. The
technical support information provides
us the information we need to
determine the impact of the proposed
revision on attainment and maintenance
of the air quality standards.
We notify a state of our completeness
determination by letter unless the
submittal becomes complete by
operation of law. A finding of
completeness does not approve the
submittal as part of the SIP nor does it
indicate that the submittal is
approvable. It does start a 12-month
clock for EPA to act on the SIP
submittal. See CAA section 110(k)(2).
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
became complete by operation of law on
June 7, 2011.
IV. Substantive Requirements for
Redesignation
The CAA establishes the requirements
for redesignation of a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) allows for redesignation
provided that the following criteria are
met: (1) EPA determines that the area
has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2)
EPA has fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under
section 110(k); (3) EPA determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP,
applicable federal air pollution control
regulations, and other permanent and
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
enforceable reductions; (4) EPA has
fully approved a maintenance plan for
the area as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 175A; and (5) the State
containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area
under section 110 and part D of the
CAA.
EPA provided guidance on
redesignations in a document entitled,
‘‘State Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990,’’ published in the Federal
Register on April 16, 1992 (57 FR
13498), and supplemented on April 28,
1992 (57 FR 18070) (referred to herein
as the ‘‘General Preamble’’). Other
relevant EPA guidance documents
include: ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards,
September 4, 1992 (referred to herein as
the ‘‘Calcagni memorandum’’); ‘‘Part D
New Source Review (part D NSR)
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment,’’
Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, October 14, 1994 (Nichols
memorandum); and ‘‘State
Implementation Plans for Serious PM10
Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment
Date Waivers for PM10 Nonattainment
Areas Generally; Addendum to the
General Preamble for the
Implementation of title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR
41998 (August 16, 1994) (PM10
Addendum).
In this proposed rulemaking action,
EPA applies these policies to the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan,
taking into consideration the specific
factual issues presented. For the reasons
set forth below in section V of this
document, we propose to approve
CARB’s request for redesignation of the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area to
attainment for the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS based on our conclusion that
all of the criteria under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) have been satisfied.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
V. Evaluation of the State’s
Redesignation Request for the
Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area
A. Determination That the Area Has
Attained the PM10 NAAQS
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) states that
for an area to be redesignated to
attainment, EPA must determine that
the area has attained the relevant
NAAQS. In this case, the relevant
NAAQS is the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
Generally, EPA determines whether
an area’s air quality is meeting the 24hour PM10 NAAQS based upon
complete,4 quality-assured, and certified
data gathered at established state and
local air monitoring stations (SLAMS) in
the nonattainment area and entered into
the EPA Air Quality System (AQS)
database. Data from air monitors
operated by state, local, or tribal
agencies in compliance with EPA
monitoring requirements must be
submitted to AQS. These monitoring
agencies certify annually that these data
are accurate to the best of their
knowledge. Accordingly, EPA relies
primarily on data in AQS when
determining the attainment status of an
area. See 40 CFR 50.6; 40 CFR part 50,
appendices J and K; 40 CFR part 53;
and, 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C,
D, and E.5 EPA will also consider air
quality data from other air monitoring
stations in the nonattainment area
provided those stations meet the federal
monitoring requirements for SLAMS,
including the quality assurance and
quality control criteria in 40 CFR part
58, appendix A. See 40 CFR 58.14
(2006) and 58.20 (2007); 6 71 FR 61236,
61242; (October 17, 2006). All valid data
are reviewed to determine the area’s air
quality status in accordance with 40
CFR part 50, appendix K.
Attainment of the 24-hour PM10
standard is determined by calculating
the expected number of exceedances of
the standard in a year. The 24-hour
PM10 standard is attained when the
expected number of exceedances
averaged over a three-year period is less
than or equal to one at each monitoring
site within the nonattainment area.
Generally, three consecutive years of air
quality data are required to show
attainment of the 24-hour PM10
standard. See 40 CFR part 50 and
appendix K.
To demonstrate attainment of the 24hour PM10 standard at a monitoring site,
the monitor must provide sufficient data
to perform the required calculations in
40 CFR part 50, appendix K. The
amount of data required varies with the
sampling frequency, data capture rate,
and the number of years of record. For
4 For PM , a complete set of data includes a
10
minimum of 75 percent of the scheduled PM10
samples per quarter. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix
K, section 2.3(a).
5 Because the annual PM
10 standard was revoked
effective December 18, 2006, this document
discusses only attainment of the 24-hour PM10
standard. See 71 FR 61144; (October 17, 2006).
6 EPA promulgated amendments to the ambient
air monitoring regulations in 40 CFR parts 53 and
58 on October 17, 2006. (See 71 FR 61236.) The
requirements for Special Purpose Monitors were
revised and moved from 40 CFR 58.14 to 40 CFR
58.20.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44497
PM10, a ‘‘complete’’ set of data includes
a minimum of 75 percent of the
scheduled PM10 samples per quarter.
See 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section
2.3(a). In all cases, three years of
representative monitoring data that meet
the 75 percent criterion should be
utilized, if available. More than three
years may be considered if all additional
representative years of data meeting the
75 percent criterion are utilized. Data
not meeting these criteria may also
suffice to show attainment; however,
such exceptions must be approved by
the appropriate Regional Administrator
in accordance with EPA guidance. See
40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 2.3.
In the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area, the agencies
responsible for assuring that the area
meets air quality monitoring
requirements include CARB and
SMAQMD. Both CARB and SMAQMD
submit annual monitoring network
plans to EPA. SMAQMD network plans
describe the monitoring network
operated by SMAQMD and CARB in
Sacramento County, and CARB’s
network plans describe the monitoring
sites CARB operates. These plans
discuss the status of the air monitoring
network, as required under 40 CFR
58.10.
EPA regularly reviews these annual
plans for compliance with the
applicable reporting requirements in 40
CFR part 58. With respect to PM10, EPA
has found that the area’s network plans,
submitted by CARB and SMAQMD,
meet the applicable requirements under
40 CFR part 58. See EPA letters to CARB
and SMAQMD approving their annual
network plans for years 2010, 2011, and
2012.7 8 EPA also concluded from its
7 Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to
Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch,
Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB
(October 29, 2010) (approving CARB’s ‘‘2010
Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the Small
Districts in California’’); Letter from Matthew Lakin,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA
Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality
Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support
Division, CARB (November 1, 2011) (approving
CARB’s ‘‘2011 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for
the Small Districts in California’’); Letter from
Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano,
Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and
Technical Support Division, CARB (April 19, 2013)
(approving CARB’s ‘‘2012 Annual Monitoring
Report for the Small Districts in California’’).
8 Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to
Larry Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer,
SMAQMD (November 1, 2010) (approving the
‘‘Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District’s 2010 Annual Monitoring Network Plan’’);
Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality
Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Larry
Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer, SMAQMD
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
Continued
24JYP1
44498
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Technical System Audit of the CARB
Primary Quality Assurance Organization
(PQAO) (conducted during the summer
of 2011), that the combined ambient air
monitoring network operated by CARB
and the local air districts in their PQAO
(which includes SMAQMD) currently
meets or exceeds the requirements for
the minimum number of SLAMS for
PM10 in the Sacramento nonattainment
area.9 CARB annually certifies that the
data it submits to AQS are complete and
quality-assured.10
There are two types of PM10 monitors
used throughout the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area monitoring network:
the Federal Reference Method (FRM)
filter-based high-volume size-selective
inlet sampler (hi-vols or SSI), and the
Federal Equivalent Method (FEM)
tapered element oscillating
microbalance (TEOM), which measures
PM10 on a continuous basis. The
schedule for PM10 sample collection is
one in six days for the FRM filter-based
high volume samplers, while the FEM
TEOM monitors operate on a daily 24hour schedule.
There were six PM10 monitoring sites
within the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area in calendar years
2010, 2011, and 2012. SMAQMD
operates five of the monitoring sites:
Goldenland Court, North Highlands, Del
Paso Manor, Branch Center Rd #2, and
Stockton Blvd. CARB operates the T
Street monitoring site. FRM filter-based
high-volume samplers are located at all
of the six sites listed above. Del Paso
Manor and the Stockton Blvd. utilize
both the FRM filter-based samplers and
FEM TEOM monitors.11 EPA defines
specific monitoring site types and
spatial scales of representativeness to
characterize the nature and location of
required monitors. For the six sites, the
spatial scale is neighborhood scale, and
the monitoring objective is population
exposure, except the T Street site, which
has a monitoring objective of highest
concentration.12
Consistent with the requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has
reviewed the quality-assured, and
certified PM10 ambient air monitoring
data as recorded in AQS for the
applicable monitoring period collected
at the monitoring sites in the
Sacramento nonattainment area and
determined that the data are complete.
Table 1 summarizes the site-specific
highest 24-hour PM10 concentrations for
the period of 2001–2012. As shown in
Table 1, only one of the highest
concentrations exceeded the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS standard of 150 mg/m3.
Table 2 summarizes the expected
number of exceedances occurring over
three-year periods dating back to EPA’s
previous clean data determination. See
67 FR 7082 (February 15, 2002). The 24hour PM10 standard is attained when the
expected number of exceedances
averaged over a three-year period is less
than or equal to one at each monitoring
site within the nonattainment area. The
highest value in Table 2 is 0.3
exceedances over a three-year period,
and the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area did not violate the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS during the 2001–
2012 period. Therefore, we are
proposing to determine, based on the
complete, quality-assured data for three
most recent years (2010–2012) that the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area
has attained the 24-hour PM10 standard.
There are six PM10 monitors currently
operating in the nonattainment area.
Preliminary SLAMS data for 2013 from
these monitors are also consistent with
continued attainment.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF HIGHEST 24-HOUR PM10 CONCENTRATIONS (μg/m3) FROM AMBIENT DATA COLLECTED WITHIN
THE SACRAMENTO PM10 NONATTAINMENT AREA, 2001–2012.a
Highest concentration (μg/m3)
Site
AQS Monitor ID
2001
North Highlands-Blackfoot ..............
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor .........
Branch Center Road #1 b ...............
Branch Center Road #2 b ...............
Sacramento-Airport Road c .............
Sacramento Health Dept.-Stockton
Blvd .............................................
Sacramento-Goldenland Court c .....
Sacramento-T Street ......................
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
06–067–0002–1
06–067–0006–1
06–067–0006–3
06–067–0283–1
06–067–0284–1
06–067–0013–1
06–067–0013–2
64
68
65
78
NA
73
51
53
86
43
77
NA
144
73
62
53
43
75
NA
NA
57
44
38
101
45
NA
35
47
110
71
49
61
NA
56
NA
65
63
132
38
81
90
NA
56
70
66
NA
56
94
NA
97
71
92
NA
89
71
NA
33
45
39
NA
76
NA
NA
48
44
19
NA
62
NA
NA
65
62
NA
NA
69
NA
NA
34
41
NA
NA
60
NA
NA
06–067–4001–2
06–067–4001–3
06–067–0014–1
06–067–0014–3
06–067–0010–1
06–067–0010–2
06–067–0010–3
58
122
NA
NA
89
73
48
85
103
NA
NA
77
86
NA
53
73
NA
NA
65
NA
NA
44
91
NA
NA
58
NA
NA
64
70
NA
NA
53
NA
NA
56
159
NA
NA
109
NA
NA
56
51
NA
NA
53
NA
NA
88
92
56
NA
73
NA
NA
45
44
48
NA
47
NA
NA
45
50
42
55
53
NA
NA
60
73
63
69
38
NA
NA
34
37
32
76
36
NA
NA
a The
data in this table are from AQS QuickLook Reports dated January 10, 2013 and June 7, 2013.
Branch Center Road #1 monitor was replaced by the Branch Center Road #2 monitor, located .25 mi to the north, in early 2006.
c The Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA: data are not available.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
b The
(October 31, 2011) (approving the ‘‘Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s
2011 Annual Monitoring Network Plan’’); Letter
from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Larry Greene, Air
Pollution Control Officer, SMAQMD (March 1,
2013) (approving the ‘‘Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District’s 2012 Annual
Monitoring Network Plan’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
9 See letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, to James Goldstene,
Executive Officer, CARB, transmitting ‘‘System
Audit of the Ambient Monitoring Program:
California Resources Board, June–September:
2011,’’ with enclosure, October 22, 2012.
10 See, e.g., letter from Sylvia Vanderspek, Chief,
Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Support Division, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX,
certifying calendar year 2012 ambient air quality
data and quality assurance data, May 16, 2013.
11 A map of the locations of Sacramento County
monitoring stations is found in Figure 3.2 of the
Sacramento PM10 Plan.
12 See footnotes 7 and 8.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
44499
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF EXPECTED EXCEEDANCES 3-YR AVERAGE FROM AMBIENT DATA COLLECTED WITHIN THE
SACRAMENTO PM10 NONATTAINMENT AREA, 2001–2012.A
Expected Exceedances 3-yr Average
Site name
North HighlandsBlackfoot .............
Sacramento-Del
Paso Manor ........
Branch Center
Road #1 b ............
Branch Center
Road #2 b ............
Sacramento-Airport
Road c .................
Sacramento Health
Dept.-Stockton
Blvd .....................
SacramentoGoldenland
Court c .................
Sacramento-T
Street ..................
Site (AQS Monitor
ID)
1999–
2001
2000–
2002
2001–
2003
2002–
2004
2003–
2005
2004–
2006
2005–
2007
2006–
2008
2007–
2009
2008–
2010
2009–
2011
2010–
2012
06–067–0002–1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
06–067–0006–1
06–067–0006–3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
06–067–0283–1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
06–067–0284–1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
06–067–0013–1
06–067–0013–2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
0
NA
0
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
06–067–4001–2
06–067–4001–3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3
0
0.3
0
0.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
06–067–0014–1
06–067–0014–3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
0
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
06–067–0010–1
06–067–0010–2
06–067–0010–3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
a The
data in this table are from AQS QuickLook Reports dated January 10, 2013 and June 7, 2013.
Branch Center Road #1 monitor was replaced by the Branch Center Road #2 monitor, located .25 mi to the north, in early 2006.
Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA: data are not available.
b The
c The
B. The Area Must Have a Fully
Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of
Redesignation Under Clean Air Act
Section 110 and Part D
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) require
EPA to determine that the area has a
fully approved applicable SIP under
section 110(k) that meets all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part
D for the purposes of redesignation.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1. Basic SIP Requirements Under
Section 110
The general SIP elements and
requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to,
the following: submittal of a SIP that has
been adopted by the State after
reasonable public notice and hearing;
provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit
program; provision for the
implementation of part C requirements
for prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) provisions;
provisions for the implementation of
part D requirements for nonattainment
new source review (nonattainment NSR)
NSR permit programs; provisions for air
pollution modeling; and provisions for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule
development.
We note that SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). The section 110
(and part D) requirements that are
linked to a particular nonattainment
area’s designation and classification are
the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request.
Requirements that apply regardless of
the designation of any particular area on
the State are not applicable
requirements for the purposes of
redesignation, and the State will remain
subject to these requirements after the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area is
redesignated to attainment.
For example, CAA section
110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain
certain measures to prevent sources in
a state from significantly contributing to
air quality problems in another state,
known as ‘‘transport SIPs.’’ Because the
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
transport SIPs are not linked to a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classification but rather
apply regardless of the attainment
status, these are not applicable
requirements for the purposes of
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
redesignation under section
107(d)(3)(E).
Similarly, EPA believes that other
section 110 (and part D) requirements
that are not linked to nonattainment
plan submissions or to an area’s
attainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. EPA believes that the
section 110 (and part D) requirements
that relate to a particular nonattainment
area’s designation and classification are
the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
view is consistent with EPA’s existing
policy on applicability of the conformity
SIP requirement for redesignations. See
discussion in 75 FR 36023, 36026 (June
24, 2010).
On numerous occasions, CARB and
SMAQMD have submitted and we have
approved provisions addressing the
basic CAA section 110 provisions. The
Sacramento portion of the California
SIP 13 contains enforceable emission
limitations; requires monitoring,
compiling and analyzing of ambient air
quality data; requires preconstruction
review of new or modified stationary
sources; provides for adequate funding,
13 Sacramento’s portion of the California SIP may
be found at https://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/
Casips?readform&count=100&state=California.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
44500
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
staff, and associated resources necessary
to implement its requirements; and
provides the necessary assurances that
the State maintains responsibility for
ensuring that the CAA requirements are
satisfied in the event that Sacramento is
unable to meet its CAA obligations.
There are no outstanding or
disapproved applicable SIP submittals
with respect to the Sacramento portion
of the SIP that prevent redesignation of
the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area for the 24-hour PM10 standard.
Therefore, we propose to conclude that
CARB and SMAQMD have met all SIP
requirements for Sacramento applicable
for purposes of redesignation under
section 110 of the CAA (General SIP
Requirements).
2. SIP Requirements Under Part D
Subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title 1 of
the CAA contain air quality planning
requirements for PM10 nonattainment
areas. Subpart 1 contains general
requirements for all nonattainment areas
of any pollutant, including PM10,
governed by a NAAQS. The subpart 1
requirements include, among other
things, provisions for the reasonable
available control measures (RACM),
reasonable further progress (RFP),
emissions inventories, contingency
measures, and conformity. Subpart 4
contains specific planning and
scheduling requirements for PM10
nonattainment areas. Section 189(a), (c),
and (e) requirements apply specifically
to moderate PM10 nonattainment areas
and include: (1) An approved permit
program for construction of new and
modified major stationary sources; (2)
provisions for RACM; (3) an attainment
demonstration; (4) quantitative
milestones demonstrating RFP toward
attainment by the applicable attainment
date; and (5) provisions to ensure that
the control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM10 also
apply to major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors except where the
Administrator has determined that such
sources do not contribute significantly
to PM10 levels that exceed the NAAQS
in the area.
As noted above, in 2002, EPA
determined that the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area attained the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS based on 1998–2000 data.
(67 FR 7082, February 15, 2002). In
accordance with EPA’s Clean Data
Policy, we have determined that the
following requirements do not apply to
the State for so long as Sacramento
continues to attain the PM10 standard or
until the area is redesignated to
attainment: an attainment
demonstration under section
189(a)(1)(B); RACM provisions under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
sections 172(c) and 189(a)(1)(C);
reasonable further progress provisions
under section 189(c)(1); and
contingency measures under section
172(c)(9). For other rulemaking actions
applying the Clean Data Policy in the
context of PM10, see 77 FR 31271–72
(proposed Determination of Attainment
for Paul Spur/Douglas, Arizona); 76 FR
10821–22 (proposed Determination of
Attainment for Truckee Meadows,
Nevada); 75 FR 13712–14 (proposed
Determination of Attainment for Coso
Junction, California); 75 FR 36027
(proposed Redesignation for Coso
Junction, California); 73 FR 22313
(proposed Redesignation for San
Joaquin Valley). See also, 40 CFR
51.918.
Moreover, in the context of evaluating
the area’s eligibility for redesignation,
there is a separate and additional
justification for finding that
requirements associated with attainment
are not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. Prior to and
independently of the Clean Data Policy,
and specifically in the context of
redesignations, EPA interpreted
attainment-linked requirements as not
applicable for purposes of
redesignation. In the General Preamble,
‘‘General Preamble for the Interpretation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990,’’ (General
Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16,
1992), EPA stated: [t]he section 172(c)(9)
requirements are directed at ensuring
RFP and attainment by the applicable
date. These requirements no longer
apply when an area has attained the
standard and is eligible for
redesignation. Furthermore, section
175A for maintenance plans * * *
provides specific requirements for
contingency measures that effectively
supersede the requirements of section
172(c)(9) for these areas. See also
Calcagni memorandum at 6 (‘‘The
requirements for reasonable further
progress and other measures needed for
attainment will not apply for
redesignations because they only have
meaning for areas not attaining the
standard.’’). Thus, even if the
requirements associated with attainment
had not previously been suspended,
they would not apply for purposes of
evaluating whether an area that has
attained the standard qualifies for
redesignation. EPA has enunciated this
position since the General Preamble was
published more than twenty years ago,
and it represents the Agency’s
interpretation of what constitutes
applicable requirements under section
107(d)(3)(E). The Courts have
recognized the scope of EPA’s authority
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to interpret ‘‘applicable requirements’’
in the redesignation context. See Sierra
Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th
Cir.2004).
The remaining applicable Part D
requirements for moderate PM10 areas
are: (1) An emission inventory under
section 172(c) (3); (2) a permit program
for the construction and operation of
new and modified major stationary
sources of PM10 under sections 172(c)(5)
and 189(a)(1)(A); (3) control
requirements for major stationary
sources of PM10 precursors under
section 189(e), except where the
Administrator determines that such
sources do not contribute significantly
to PM10 levels that exceed the standard
in the area; (4) requirements under
section 172(c)(7) that meet the
applicable provisions of section
110(a)(2); and (5) provisions to ensure
that federally supported or funded
projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP
under section 176(c). We discuss each of
these requirements below.
• Emissions Inventory
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires states
to submit a comprehensive, accurate,
current inventory of relevant PM10
pollutants for the baseline year from all
sources within the nonattainment area.
The inventory is to address direct and
secondary PM10 emissions, and all
stationary (generally referring to larger
stationary source or ‘‘point’’ sources),
area (generally referring to smaller
stationary and fugitive sources), and
mobile (on-road, nonroad, locomotive
and aircraft) sources are to be included
in the inventory. We interpret the Act
such that the emission inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) are
satisfied by the inventory requirements
of the maintenance plan. See 57 FR
13498, at 13564 (April 16, 1992). Thus,
EPA is proposing to approve the
attainment inventories submitted as part
of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan as satisfying the requirements of
sections 172(c)(3) for the purposes of
redesignation of the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment for the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS. The attainment
inventories are described in V.D.1 of
this notice.
• Permits for New and Modified Major
Stationary Sources
CAA Sections 172(c)(5) and
189(a)(1)(A) require the State to submit
SIP revisions that establish certain
requirements for new or modified
stationary sources in nonattainment
areas, including provisions to ensure
that major new sources or major
modifications of existing sources of
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
nonattainment pollutants incorporate
the highest level of control, referred to
as the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
(LAER), and that increases in emissions
from such stationary sources are offset
so as to provide for reasonable further
progress towards attainment in the
nonattainment area. The process for
reviewing permit applications and
issuing permits for new or modified
stationary sources in nonattainment
areas is referred to as ‘‘nonattainment
New Source Review’’ (nonattainment
NSR).
EPA has previously approved
SMAQMD Rule 203 (Prevention of
Significant Deterioration) and partially
approved and partially disapproved
SMAQMD Rule 214 (Federal New
Source Review). 76 FR 43183 (July 20,
2011). Because of the partial
disapproval, SMAQMD does not
currently have a fully-approved
nonattainment NSR program.
The NSR deficiencies identified in
EPA’s partial approval and partial
disapproval of Rule 214 are limited to
the following issues: (1) A small number
of definitions: ‘‘begin actual
construction,’’ ‘‘federally enforceable,’’
and ‘‘necessary preconstruction
approvals or permits’’; (2) the rule is
missing adequate public notice
requirements for minor sources; (3) the
rule is missing provisions meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii)
and 40 CFR 51.307(b)(2); and (4) the
rule contains a cross reference to Rule
207—Title V—Federal Operating Permit
Program, which is not SIP approved.
The limited disapproval triggered an
obligation on EPA to promulgate a
federal implementation plan (FIP) to
remedy the NSR deficiencies by August
19, 2013. See 76 FR 43184 (July 20,
2011). To correct the deficiencies, on
September 26, 2012, CARB submitted
amended SMAQMD Rule 214 for
inclusion in the SIP. On February 14,
2013, a notice of proposed rulemaking
to approve revised Rule 214 was
published in the Federal Register. See
78 FR 10589. On April 25, 2013,
Regional Administrator Jared
Blumenfeld signed a notice of final
rulemaking to approve revised Rule 214.
It is currently awaiting publication in
the Federal Register. If the final
rulemaking for revised Rule 214
becomes effective prior to EPA
finalizing the area’s redesignation to
attainment for PM10, the 172(c)(5) and
189(a(1)(A) requirements would be
fulfilled prior to redesignation.
If EPA does not approve revised Rule
214 prior to EPA finalizing the area’s
redesignation to attainment for PM10, it
would not affect EPA approval of the
redesignation request because upon
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
redesignation the requirements of
SMAQMD’s PSD program would apply
to PM10 and PM10 precursor emissions
of new major sources or major
modifications. Thus, new major sources
with significant PM10 emissions and
major modifications of PM10 at major
sources as defined under 40 CFR 51.21
will be required to obtain a PSD permit
or include PM10 emissions in their
existing PSD permit. Since PSD
requirements 14 will apply after
redesignation, an area being
redesignated to attainment need not
comply with the requirement that a
nonattainment NSR program be
approved prior to redesignation as long
as the state demonstrates maintenance
of the NAAQS in the area without
implementation of nonattainment NSR.
A more detailed rationale for this view
is described in a memorandum from
Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14,
1994, titled ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ See also,
redesignation rulemakings for Detroit,
Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7,
1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio
(61 FR 20458, 20469–20470, May 7,
1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR
53665, October 23, 2001); and, Grand
Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837,
June 21, 1996).
Based on our review of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, we
conclude that the maintenance
demonstration does not rely on
implementation of nonattainment NSR
because the Plan applies standard
growth factors to stationary source
emissions and does not rely on NSR
offsets to reduce the rate of increase in
emissions over time from point
sources.15 In addition, the PM10
Maintenance Plan adds emission
reduction credits (ERCs) for PM10, NOX,
and SOx to future projected emissions to
ensure that the use of ERCs will not be
inconsistent with the future PM10
maintenance goals. Therefore, EPA
concludes that a fully-approved
nonattainment NSR program is not
necessary for approval of the State’s
redesignation request for the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area.
We conclude that Sacramento’s
portion of the California SIP adequately
meets the requirements of section
172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A) for purposes
of this redesignation.
14 PSD requirements control the growth of new
source emissions in areas designated as attainment
for a NAAQS.
15 See letter, Larry Greene, Executive Officer,
SMAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 28, 2013.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44501
• Control Requirements for PM10
Precursors
Section 189(e) of the CAA requires
that the control requirements applicable
under the part D SIP for major stationary
sources of PM10 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors,
except where the Administrator
determines that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels
which exceed the standard in the area.
Sacramento’s PM10 Maintenance Plan
states that NOX is a PM10 precursor in
the secondary formation of atmospheric
ammonium nitrates, which are a
significant component of PM10
concentrations in the Sacramento area.
SMAQMD also determined, based on
analyses of inventories 16 from CARB
and Chemical Mass Balance modeling,
that emissions of sulfur oxides 17 (SOX)
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from sources in the Sacramento
nonattainment area are an insignificant
contributor to secondary particulate
formation in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area. Therefore, SOX and
VOC emissions are not included in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
See pages 4–1 and 5–4 in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. To
satisfy ozone nonattainment
requirements in CAA section 182(b),
SMAQMD has adopted Reasonably
Available Control Technology rules to
reduce NOX emissions from existing
sources. See Rules 411, 412, and 413 in
Table 3 in this action. These rules also
address the control requirements in
CAA section 189(e) because they control
NOX emissions from major stationary
sources. Major stationary sources of
NOX are also controlled by Rules 202
and 203, which are the District’s
nonattainment NSR and PSD permitting
programs.
• Compliance with Section 110(a)(2)
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we
conclude the California SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)
applicable for purposes of this
redesignation.
16 California Emission Forecasting System (CEFS)
Version 1.06 Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD,
Rf#980.
17 The following SMAQMD measures were
previously implemented to reduce sulfur dioxide
emissions: Rule 406—Specific Contaminants and
Rule 420—Sulfur Content of Fuels. These measures
were approved into the SIP on December 5, 1984
(49 FR 47490). Adjusting for the past decrease in
SOX emissions, current ambient ammonium sulfate
concentrations are estimated to be about 1 mg/m3.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
44502
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
• General and Transportation
Conformity Requirements
Under section 176(c) of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990, states are
required to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally
supported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. Section 176(c) further
provides that state conformity
provisions must be consistent with
federal conformity regulations that the
CAA requires EPA to promulgate. EPA’s
conformity regulations are codified at 40
CFR part 93, subparts A (referred to
herein as ‘‘transportation conformity’’)
and B (referred to herein as ‘‘general
conformity’’). Transportation conformity
applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects developed,
funded, and approved under title 23
U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act, and
general conformity applies to all other
federally-supported or funded projects.
SIP revisions intended to address the
conformity requirements are referred to
herein as ‘‘conformity SIPs.’’
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of a redesignation request
under section 107(d) because state
conformity rules are still required after
redesignation and federal conformity
rules apply where state rules have not
been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.
3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this
interpretation. See also, 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995).
Thus, EPA proposes to determine
that, if EPA later finalizes its approval
of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan described in today’s proposal and
also finalizes its approval of the
emissions inventory and motor vehicle
emissions budgets for SMAQMD, the
State has a fully-approved SIP meeting
all requirements applicable under
section 110 and part D for the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area
for purposes of redesignation. CAA
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
C. EPA Has Determined That the
Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
in Emissions
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA
to determine that the improvement in
air quality is due to emission reductions
that are permanent and enforceable
resulting from the implementation of
the applicable SIP and applicable
Federal air pollution control regulations
and other permanent and enforceable
regulations in order to approve a
redesignation to attainment. Under this
criterion, the State must be able to
reasonably attribute the improvement in
air quality to emissions reductions
which are permanent and enforceable.
Attainment resulting from temporary
reductions in emissions rates (e.g.,
reduced production or shutdown due to
temporary adverse economic
conditions) or unusually favorable
meteorology would not qualify as an air
quality improvement due to permanent
and enforceable emission reductions.
Calcagni memorandum, p. 4.
Historically, exceedances of the 24hour PM10 NAAQS in the Sacramento
nonattainment area occur in late
November and December. The Chemical
Mass Balance (CMB) model was used to
identify source contributions for
ambient air quality samples collected
during the winter months (i.e.,
November through January) for 1991–
1996. CMB uses known chemical
‘‘fingerprints’’ of various source types
together with measurements of the
chemical components of ambient PM10
to find the contribution of those sources
to PM10 concentrations. CMB results
show the main components of
wintertime PM10 in the Sacramento
nonattainment area were secondary
ammonium nitrate particles (29%),
motor vehicle exhaust from cars, trucks,
and buses (23%), wood smoke (17%),
and fugitive dust (12%).18 The CMB
analysis indicates how reductions in
emissions of primary PM10 and PM10
precursors (e.g., NOX) will reduce
ambient PM10 concentrations; each of
the ambient components can be ‘‘rolled
back’’ in proportion to the emission
changes in the corresponding source
categories. The Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan credits control
measures adopted and implemented by
SMAQMD and CARB and approved into
the SIP by EPA as reducing emissions to
attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
The SMAQMD has jurisdiction over
air quality planning requirements for
Sacramento County. The SMAQMD has
adopted numerous plans, rules, and
revisions for Sacramento County in
order to reduce PM10 and PM10
precursor emissions. The Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan includes a list
of control measures adopted and
implemented by SMAQMD and
approved into the SIP by EPA as
reducing emissions to attain the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. Table 3 lists SMAQMD
rules contributing towards attainment
and/or continued attainment of the 24hour PM10 NAAQS.
TABLE 3—SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AQMD CONTROL MEASURES AND PROGRAMS CONTRIBUTING TOWARDS
ATTAINMENT AND/OR CONTINUED ATTAINMENT OF THE 24-HOUR PM10 NAAQS.
Date
approved into
SIP
Title
401 ............................
403 ............................
Ringelmann Chart/Opacity ...................................................................................................
Fugitive Dust ........................................................................................................................
02/01/1984
12/05/1984
404 ............................
Particulate Matter .................................................................................................................
07/13/1987
405 ............................
Dust and Condensed Fumes ...............................................................................................
12/05/1984
406 ............................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Rule
Specific Contaminants ..........................................................................................................
12/05/1984
407 ............................
Open Burn ............................................................................................................................
12/05/1984
417 ............................
Wood Burning Appliances ....................................................................................................
04/11/2013
408 ............................
Incinerator Burning ...............................................................................................................
12/05/1984
18 See Sacramento PM
10 Maintenance Plan,
section 3.5, page 3–10.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
Citation
49 FR 3987.
49 FR
47490.
52 FR
26148.
49 FR
47490.
49 FR
47490.
49 FR
47490.
78 FR
21540.
49 FR
47490.
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
44503
TABLE 3—SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AQMD CONTROL MEASURES AND PROGRAMS CONTRIBUTING TOWARDS
ATTAINMENT AND/OR CONTINUED ATTAINMENT OF THE 24-HOUR PM10 NAAQS.—Continued
Date
approved into
SIP
Rule
Title
409 ............................
Orchard Heaters ...................................................................................................................
12/05/1984
411 ............................
NOX from Boilers, Process Heaters, and Steam Generators ..............................................
08/01/2007
412 ............................
Stationary Source Internal Combustion Engines at Major Stationary Sources of NOX ......
04/30/1996
413 ............................
414 ............................
Stationary Gas Turbines ......................................................................................................
Natural Gas Fired Water Heaters ........................................................................................
02/11/1999
04/20/1999,
11/01/2011
420 ............................
Sulfur Content of Fuels ........................................................................................................
12/05/1984
501 ............................
Agricultural Burning ..............................................................................................................
12/05/1984
Citation
49 FR
47490.
72 FR
41894.
61 FR
18959.
64 FR 6803.
64 FR 19277
76 FR
67366.
49 FR
47490.
49 FR
47490.
Other SMAQMD measures or programs not in the SIP 19 20
421 ............................
Mandatory Episodic Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid Fuel Burning. ..........................
Wood Stove/
Fireplace
Change Out
Incentive
Program.
Spare The
Air.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
19 On September 26, 2012, Rule 421 was submitted to EPA for inclusion in the SIP. The Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Incentive Program, Spare The Air public education program, and Sacramento Valley Air Basin Smoke Management Program have not been submitted for inclusion in the SIP.
20 Sacramento County also participates in the State’s Sacramento Valley Air Basin Smoke Management Program. The program describes the
policies and procedures used with hourly and daily measurements of air quality and meteorology to determine how much open biomass burning
can be allowed in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. The program ensures that agricultural burning is prohibited on days meteorologically conducive to potentially elevated PM10 concentrations. The area covered by the program is referred to as the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, and includes all or parts of the following counties: Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Placer (portion), Sacramento, Shasta, Solano (portion), Sutter, Tehama, Yolo
and Yuba. See Title 17 California Code of Regulations, Subchapter 2, Section 80100 et. seq. The regulations can be viewed at https://
www.arb.ca.gov/smp/regs/RevFinRegwTOC.pdf.
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. 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 measures have
helped reduce primary PM10 and PM10
precursors in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area and throughout the
State.
CARB’s 2007 State Strategy and 2009
and 2011 updates to the State Strategy
provide a recent summary of the
measures adopted and implemented by
the State.21 From 1994 to 2006, the State
21 See ‘‘Air Resources Board’s Proposed State
Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation
Plan,’’ release date: April 26, 2007 (2007 State
Strategy).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
promulgated more than thirty-five rules
that have achieved significant emission
reductions contributing to attainment
and continued attainment in the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area.
See 2007 State Strategy, p.38.22 23 These
measures include new emission
standards and in-use requirements that
have resulted in significant reductions
in emissions of PM10 and PM10
precursors (e.g., NOX) from categories
such as passenger cars, trucks, buses,
motorcycles, locomotives, cargo
22 The 2007 Proposed State Strategy can be found
at: https://arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/
apr07draft/sipback.pdf. Page 38 of the Proposed
State Strategy lists forty-five actions; thirty-five of
these actions provide NOX reductions.
23 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 and
adopted April 24, 2009 (‘‘2009 State Strategy Status
Report’’). This submittal updated the 2007 State
Strategy to reflect its implementation during 2007
and 2008. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
handling equipment, and large off-road
equipment. EPA has generally approved
into the SIP all of the State’s measures
that are not subject to the CAA section
209 waiver process. See EPA’s final
approval of the San Joaquin Valley
PM2.5 Plan at 76 FR 69896 (November 9,
2011) and accompanying Technical
Support Document and Responses to
Comments.24 Finally, in addition to the
local district and State rules discussed
above, the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area has also benefitted
from emission reductions from federal
measures. These federal measures
include EPA‘s national emissions
standards for heavy-duty diesel trucks
(66 FR 5001 (January 18, 2001)), certain
emissions standards for new
construction and farm equipment (Tier
2 and 3 non-road engines standards, 63
FR 56968 (October 23, 1998) and Tier 4
diesel non-road engine standards, 69 FR
38958 (June 29, 2004)), and locomotive
engine standards (63 FR 18978 (April
24 Technical Support Document and Responses to
Comments, Final Rule on the San Joaquin Valley
2008 PM2.5 State Implementation Plan, September
30, 2011. This document can be found at: https://
www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPAR09-OAR-2010-0516-0175.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
44504
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
16, 1998) and 73 FR 37096 (June 30,
2008)).
The on-road and off-road vehicle and
engine standards cited above have
contributed to improved air quality
through the gradual, continued turnover
and replacement of older vehicle
models with newer models
manufactured to meet increasingly
stringent emissions standards.
We note that many of the control
measures cited above and in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
have provided emissions reductions
since 1990, and thus, the improvement
in air quality since 1990 may reasonably
be attributed to them.
A sense of the effectiveness of the
control measures to reduce PM10 and
PM10 precursor emissions can be gained
by comparing emissions in 1990 (a
nonattainment year), 2000 (the year EPA
determined the area met its attainment
date) and 2008 (an attainment year).25 In
1990, area-wide PM10 and NOX
emissions in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area were estimated to be
approximately 37 and 133 tons per day
(winter day), respectively. In 2000,
despite an increase in population and
vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) of
approximately 14% and 15%,
respectively, area-wide emissions of
PM10 dropped to 33 tons per day and
NOX declined to 100 tons per day
compared. Despite increases between
1990 and 2008 in population (29%) and
VMT (35%), area-wide emissions of
direct PM10 decreased slightly to 35 tons
per day. NOX emissions decreased
significantly to 82 tons per day, a
reduction of approximately 38%
compared to 1990 levels.
With respect to the connection
between the emissions reductions and
the improvement in air quality, we also
conclude that the air quality
improvement in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area since 1990 through
2011 is not the result of a local
economic downturn or unusual or
extreme weather patterns. Our
conclusion is based on the air quality
data in Table 1 and recognition that the
fluctuation in economic and
meteorological conditions since 1998
did not result in a violation of the 24hour PM10 standard.26 We do recognize
that a significant economic slowdown
occurred nationally starting in 2008, but
we note that the downward PM10 trend
had already been established before that
25 See Appendix A in the Sacramento PM
10
Maintenance Plan.
26 EPA’s February 2002 determination that the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area had attained
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS was based on complete,
quality-assured, and certified ambient air
monitoring data for 1998–2000.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
time (see Figure 3.3 on page 3–7 of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan).
Thus, we find that the improvement
in air quality in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area is the result of
permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions from a combination of EPAapproved local and State control
measures and federal control measures.
As such, we propose to find that the
criterion for redesignation set forth at
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) is satisfied.
D. The Area Must Have a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Under
Clean Air Act Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. We
interpret this section of the Act to
require, in general, the following core
elements: attainment inventory,
maintenance demonstration plus a
commitment to submit a second
maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation, monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment,
and contingency plan. See Calcagni
memorandum, pages 8 through 13.
Under CAA section 175A, a
maintenance plan must demonstrate
continued attainment of the applicable
NAAQS for at least ten years after EPA
approves a redesignation to attainment.
Eight years after redesignation, the State
must submit a revised maintenance plan
that demonstrates continued attainment
for the subsequent ten-year period
following the initial ten-year
maintenance period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations,
the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency provisions that EPA deems
necessary to promptly correct any
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation of the area. Based on our
review and evaluation of the plan, as
detailed below, we are proposing to
approve the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan because we believe
that it meets the requirements of CAA
section 175A.
1. Attainment Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires
plan submittals to include a
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources in the nonattainment area. In
demonstrating maintenance in
accordance with CAA section 175A and
the Calcagni memorandum, the State
should provide an attainment emissions
inventory to identify the level of
emissions in the area sufficient to attain
the NAAQS. Where the State has made
an adequate demonstration that air
quality has improved as a result of the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SIP, the attainment inventory will
generally be an inventory of actual
emissions at the time the area attained
the standard. EPA’s primary guidance in
evaluating these inventories is the
document entitled, ‘‘PM–10 Emissions
Inventory Requirements,’’ EPA, OAQPS,
EPA–454/R–94–033 (September 1994)
which can be found at: https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eidocs/
pm10eir.pdf.
A maintenance plan for the 24-hour
PM10 standard must include an
inventory of emissions of PM10 and its
precursors (NOX, sulfur oxides, and
volatile organic compounds) in the area
to identify a level of emissions sufficient
to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. This
inventory must be consistent with EPA’s
most recent guidance on emissions
inventories for nonattainment areas
available at the time and should
represent emissions during the time
period associated with the monitoring
data showing attainment. The inventory
must also be comprehensive, including
emissions from stationary point sources,
area sources, and mobile sources.
SMAQMD selected year 2008 as the
year for the attainment inventory in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Year 2008 is a current, accurate, and
comprehensive inventory during a
period which the area continued to
attain the 24-hour PM10 standard prior
to adoption and submittal of the
redesignation request and maintenance
plan. The attainment inventory will
generally be the actual inventory during
the time period the area attained the
standard. EPA previously made an
attainment determination for the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area.
See 67 FR 7082, February 15, 2002.
Thus, Sacramento Metropolitan’s
selection of 2008 for the attainment
inventory is acceptable.
Based on our review of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, we
find that the emissions inventories in
the Plan are comprehensive in that they
include estimates of PM10 and its
precursors from all of the relevant
source categories, which the Plan
divides among stationary, area wide, onroad motor vehicles, and other mobile.
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan includes inventories for total
primary PM10 and for NOX as a PM10
precursor. See tables 4–1 and 4–2 in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Appendix A to the PM10 Maintenance
Plan contains additional details of the
emission inventories for 2008 (and
1990, 1995, 2000, 2012, and 2022). As
previously described in section V.B.2,
SMAQMD determined, based on
analyses of inventories from CARB and
Chemical Mass Balance modeling, that
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
44505
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
emissions of SOx and VOCs from
sources in the Sacramento
nonattainment area are an insignificant
contributor to secondary particulate
formation in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area. Therefore, SOx and
VOC emissions are not included in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
The stationary source category
includes non-mobile, fixed sources of
air pollution. Examples of sources
included in this category include fuel
combustion (e.g., electric utilities),
waste disposal (e.g., landfills), and oil
and gas production. SMAQMD’s 2008
(and subsequent year inventories) for
stationary sources were developed using
methods in CARB’s 2009 Almanac 27
and information reported by emission
sources to SMAQMD and entered into
the California Emission Inventory
Development and Reporting System
(CEIDARS) database.28 For area wide
sources, SMAQMD calculated emissions
based on reported data for fuel usage,
product sales, population, employment
data, and other parameters covering a
wide range of activities.29
The on-road mobile source category
consists of trucks, automobiles, buses,
and motorcycles. The on-road emissions
inventory estimates in the Sacramento
PM10 Plan were prepared by CARB
using EMFAC2007 (version 2.3), a
California model for on-road motor
vehicle emissions.30 The vehicle miles
traveled were developed from
Sacramento Area Council of
Governments-supplied activity data
using transportation modeling prepared
for the Sacramento region’s August 2009
Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program.31
With respect to nonroad mobile
sources (or other mobile as categorized
in the PM10 Plan), the category includes
aircraft, trains, boats, and off-road
vehicles and equipment used for
construction, farming, commercial,
industrial, and recreational activities.
CARB used its OFFROAD2007 to
calculate the nonroad emissions.32 In
general, emissions are calculated using
equipment population, engine size and
load, usage activity, and emission
factors.
Table 4 presents the direct PM10 and
PM10 precursor emissions (i.e., NOX)
estimates contained in the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan for 2008. Based
on the estimates in table 4, the areawide category of emissions accounted
for 86% of the direct PM10, with
residential fuel combustion making up
28%, construction and demolition 20%,
and paved road dust 17% of the total
direct PM10 inventory for 2008. Mobile
source emissions accounted for 90% of
the NOX emissions generated within the
PM10 nonattainment area in 2008 with
on-road motor vehicle emissions
comprising approximately 61% and offroad equipment 20% of the total NOX
inventory for 2008.
TABLE 4—2008 ACTUAL PM10 EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES IN THE SACRAMENTO PM10
NONATTAINMENT AREA, TOTAL DAILY EMISSIONS
[Tons per day, average winter day]a
2008
Category
Emission source
PM10
Stationary ......................................................................
Area wide ......................................................................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ..............................................
Other Mobile .................................................................
Totals
a From
Fuel Combustion ..........................................................
Industrial Processes .....................................................
Residential Fuel Combustion .......................................
Farming Operations ......................................................
Construction and Demolition ........................................
Paved Road Dust .........................................................
Unpaved Road Dust .....................................................
Managed Burning and Disposal ...................................
Other .............................................................................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ..............................................
Aircraft ..........................................................................
Trains ............................................................................
Boats .............................................................................
Equipment (Off-Road/Farm) .........................................
.......................................................................................
NOX
0.5
1.0
9.9
2.4
7.0
6.1
3.6
........................
1.2
2.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.1
3.9
0.1
4.4
........................
........................
........................
........................
0.1
........................
49.6
2.0
3.4
0.5
17.8
35
82
Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Based on our review of the emissions
inventories (and related documentation)
from the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan, we find that the inventories for
2008 are comprehensive, that the
methods and assumptions used by
CARB and SMAQMD to develop the
emission inventories are reasonable, and
that the 2008 inventory reasonably
estimates actual PM10 emissions in the
attainment year. Therefore, we are
proposing to approve the 2008
inventory, which serves as the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan’s
attainment year inventory, as satisfying
the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of
the CAA for the purposes of
redesignation of the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment of the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
27 The 2009 Almanac contains information about
current and historical air quality and emissions in
California. In addition, forecasted emissions are
presented. See https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/
almanac09/almanac09.htm
28 The CEIDARS database consists of two
categories of information: source information and
utility information. Source information includes the
basic inventory information generated and collected
on all point and area sources. Utility information
generally includes auxiliary data, which helps
categorize and further define the source
information. Used together, CEIDARS is capable of
generating complex reports based on a multitude of
category and source selection criteria.
29 For more information on emissions from the
area-wide source category, see the CARB Web site:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm.
30 EMFAC software and detailed information on
the vehicle emission model can be found on the
CARB Web site at https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/
onroad/on-road.htm.
31 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement
Program 2009/12, Sacramento Area Council of
Governments, August 21, 2008.
32 See https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/
offroad.htm
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2. Maintenance Demonstration
Section 175A(a) of the CAA requires
that the maintenance plan ‘‘provide for
the maintenance of the national primary
ambient air quality standard for such air
pollutant in the area concerned for at
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
44506
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
least 10 years after the redesignation.’’
Generally, a state may demonstrate
maintenance of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS by modeling to show that the
future mix of sources and emissions
rates will not cause a violation of the
NAAQS. A showing that future
emissions will not exceed the level of
the attainment year inventory can also
be used to further support of a
maintenance demonstration. For areas
that are required under the Act to
submit modeled attainment
demonstrations, the maintenance
demonstration should use the same type
of modeling. Calcagni memorandum,
page 9.
In addition to accounting for areawide growth trends, SMAQMD included
growth in airport emissions to
accommodate future airport expansions
within the Sacramento County Airport
System.33 The portion of the 2012 and
2022 inventories associated with
airports is detailed in table 5.
TABLE 5—AIRPORT EMISSIONS FOR SACRAMENTO COUNTY ONLY, TOTAL DAILY EMISSIONS
[Tons per day, average winter day] a
NOX
PM10
Emission source
2012
Aircraft Operations Only ..................................................................................
Ground Support Equipment .............................................................................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
a From
2022
2.3
0.3
2012
3.0
0.2
2022
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
table 4–4 in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
SMAQMD also included emissions
reduction credits (ERCs) from pre-2008
ERCs, future bankable rice burning
ERCs, and the wood stove/fireplace
change out incentive program in the
event that the ERCs are used for the
purposes of issuing permits for new or
modified stationary sources in the air
quality planning area.34
We have reviewed the methods and
assumptions, as described in connection
with the attainment inventory, that
SMAQMD used to project emissions to
2012 and 2022 for the various source
categories and find them to be
reasonable. The Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan’s maintenance
demonstration is based on the use of
Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) with
proportional rollback (69 FR 5412,
5424–5425 and 69 FR 30006) to
demonstrate maintenance of the 24-hour
PM10 standard until 2022. See Plan, pp.
6–1—6–5. Under proportional rollback,
changes in source categories’ emissions
are added in proportion to their
corresponding component from CMB. In
proportional rollback, a 1% change in
direct PM10 emissions causes a 1%
change in the direct PM10 ambient
component. However, because
ammonium nitrate is secondary PM,
that is, it is formed from chemical
reactions in the air, it does not
necessarily scale one-to-one with the
precursor NOX emissions. The Plan
relied on photochemical modeling
results showing that a 1% change in
NOX emission causes only a 0.7%
change in ammonium nitrate. See Plan,
p. 6–3.
The results of the modeling show that
all monitoring sites in the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area will be below
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in 2022, with
the projected value of 99 mg/m3 at the
T Street site, which had the peak
monitored value from 2006–2008 in the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area.
See Plan, Table 6.3.
In addition to the CMB rollback
modeling in the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan, it also demonstrates
that the 2022 maintenance year
inventory is well below the 2008
attainment year inventory for PM10
precursors (i.e., NOX) and flat for direct
PM10. Thus, even without the rollback
analysis previously described, the Plan
clearly demonstrates maintenance of the
PM10 NAAQS through 2022. Tables 6, 7
and 8 compare inventory estimates for
direct PM10 and PM10 precursor (i.e.,
NOX) for various years, including the
2008 attainment year, 2012, and the
2022 maintenance year. Since current
ambient concentrations are well below
the NAAQS, the slight increase in
projected direct PM10 emissions is
consistent with maintenance of the
NAAQS. Even if all ambient PM10 were
directly emitted (i.e., without
accounting for the benefit of NOx
reductions), the 2008 measured ambient
level of 109 mg/m3 could increase by
37% and remain below the NAAQS, so
direct PM10 emissions could also
increase by 37% and the area would
remain in attainment. In fact, direct
PM10 is projected to increase by only
3% (or 7% considering potential
increases in road dust allowed for in the
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget). This
is a very conservative conclusion,
because is assumes NOx emissions are
constant, whereas they are actually
33 See Sacramento PM
10 Maintenance Plan,
section 4.7, page 4–10.
34 See Sacramento PM
10 Maintenance Plan,
section 4.7, page 4–11.
35 The 2022 emission inventory includes
emissions reductions from State measures adopted
through 2006. Because the measures in Table 3
were adopted after 2006, the 2022 inventory is a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
projected to decrease by 50%, with an
accompanying reduction in the
ammonium nitrate component of PM10.
The effects of the declining NOx and
slightly increasing PM constitute a
variant of simple rollback modeling, and
can be considered a second, supporting
maintenance demonstration method in
addition to the CMB proportional
rollback demonstration.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF 2008 ACTUAL
AND 2012 AND 2022 PROJECTED
PM10 AND NOX EMISSIONS IN THE
SACRAMENTO PM10 NONATTAINMENT
AREA
[Tons per day, average winter day]a
Pollutants
PM10 ..............................
NOX ..............................
2008
2012
2022
35
82
35
67
36
42
a From Appendix A in the Sacramento PM
10
Maintenance Plan; includes Emission Reduction Credits in 2012 and 2022 for PM10 and
NOX in table 4–5 of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.
Based on our review of the 2012 and
2022 emissions inventories and related
documentation from the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan, we find that
the 2012 and 2022 emissions
inventories in the PM10 Maintenance
Plan reflect the latest planning
assumptions and emissions models
available at the time the Plan was
developed, and provide a
comprehensive and reasonably accurate
basis upon which to forecast direct PM10
and PM10 precursor emissions for years
2012 and 2022.35 These inventories
further support maintenance through
2022.
conservative estimate of the projected emissions.
December 27, 2012 email from Martin Johnson of
CARB to John Ungvarsky, EPA.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
44507
TABLE 7—2008 ACTUAL AND 2012 AND 2022 PROJECTED PM10 EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES IN THE
SACRAMENTO PM10 NONATTAINMENT AREA, TOTAL DAILY EMISSIONS
[Tons per day, average winter day] a
PM10
Category
Emission source
2008
Stationary ........................................................
Area wide ........................................................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ................................
Other Mobile ...................................................
Totals .......................................................
a From
Fuel Combustion ............................................
Industrial Processes .......................................
Residential Fuel Combustion .........................
Farming Operations .......................................
Construction and Demolition ..........................
Paved Road Dust ...........................................
Unpaved Road Dust .......................................
Other ..............................................................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ................................
Aircraft ............................................................
Trains .............................................................
Boats ..............................................................
Equipment (Off-Road/Farm) ...........................
.........................................................................
2012
0.5
1.0
9.9
2.4
7.0
6.1
3.6
1.2
2.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.1
35
2022
0.5
0.9
9.2
2.3
7.2
6.2
3.6
1.3
2.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.0
35
0.6
1.1
10.2
2.1
7.8
6.4
3.6
1.4
2.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
36
Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
TABLE 8—2008 AND PROJECTED 2012 AND 2022 NOX EMISSIONS FROM VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES IN THE
SACRAMENTO PM10 NONATTAINMENT AREA, TOTAL DAILY EMISSIONS
[Tons per day, average winter day] a
NOX
Category
Emission source
2008
Stationary ........................................................
Areawide .........................................................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ................................
Other Mobile ...................................................
Totals .......................................................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
a From
Fuel Combustion ............................................
Industrial Processes .......................................
Residential Fuel Combustion .........................
Managed Burning and Disposal .....................
On-Road Motor Vehicles ................................
Aircraft ............................................................
Trains .............................................................
Boats ..............................................................
Off-Road Equipment ......................................
Farm Equipment .............................................
.........................................................................
2012
3.9
0.1
4.4
0.1
49.6
2.0
3.4
0.5
16.0
1.8
82
2022
4.0
0.1
4.3
0.1
37.6
2.3
3.3
0.5
13.6
1.4
67
4.2
0.1
4.4
0.1
18.1
3.0
3.6
0.5
7.6
0.6
42
Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Taking the CMB results into account
gives an even stronger conclusion with
respect to the acceptability of the slight
increase of direct PM10 emissions.
According to the CMB proportional
rollback, direct PM10 contributes 81 mg/
m3 of the 2008 total. See Plan, Table 6.3,
p. 6–5. Considering the measured 109
mg/m3, that component could increase
by 41 mg/m3, or 50%, and the sum
would remain below the NAAQS. When
combined, the projected slight PM10
emissions increase and substantial NOX
emissions decrease are well below the
levels consistent with attainment
through the 2022 maintenance period
and thereby adequately demonstrate
maintenance through that period.
a. Showing That Maintenance Plan
Provides for Ten Years of Maintenance
Through 2023
Section 175A requires a state seeking
redesignation to attainment to submit a
SIP revision to provide for the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
maintenance of the NAAQS in the area
‘‘for at least 10 years after the
redesignation.’’ EPA has interpreted this
as a showing of maintenance ‘‘for a
period of ten years following
redesignation.’’ September 4, 1992
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, AQMD, ‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’ p. 9.
As discussed in detail above, the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
expressly documents that the area’s
emissions inventories will remain below
the attainment year inventories through
2022. In addition, for the reasons set
forth below, EPA believes that the
State’s submission, in conjunction with
additional supporting information,
further demonstrates that the area will
continue to maintain the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS at least through 2023. Thus, if
EPA finalizes its proposed approval of
the redesignation request and
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance plans in 2013, it will be
based in part on a showing, in
accordance with section 175A, that the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
provides for maintenance for at least ten
years after redesignation. EPA believes
the area will continue to maintain the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS at least through
2023 for the following reasons.
1. Significant emissions controls
remain in place and will continue to
provide reductions that keep the area in
attainment. Because the Sacramento
area is currently nonattainment for the
1997 and 2008 ozone standards and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, it is
expected that not only will existing
emissions controls remain in place, but
the Sacramento area may need
additional reductions (e.g., NOX) to
attain the aforementioned standards. In
addition, the emissions controls that
brought the area into attainment cannot
be removed from the SIP unless the
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
44508
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
State demonstrates that the removal
would be consistent with sections 110(l)
and 193 of the CAA.
2. The 2022 projected emissions
inventory for PM10 precursors is well
below the 2008 attainment year level
and is expected to decline or remain
stable during the 2022 to 2023 period.
It is extremely improbable that
emissions would increase between 2022
and 2023 such that they would exceed
the 2008 attainment year levels. As
shown in table 7, while primary PM10
emissions have remained relatively flat,
by 2022 NOX emissions are projected to
decline by approximately 70% and 49%
when compared to 1990 and 2008,
respectively. The majority of these
reductions resulted from cleaner fuels,
tighter emission standards, and fleet
turnover in the mobile source sector.
The 2022 emission inventory is
conservative in that it does not include
reductions from State measures adopted
after 2006. Because Sacramento is
nonattainment for the 1997 and 2008
ozone standards and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard, SMAQMD and the State
may need to adopt additional measures
that will further reduce emissions
between 2013 and 2023. Because
fundamental relaxations or changes to
the existing SIP-approved measures,
mobile source fleet, and infrastructure
cannot be easily made or reversed
during the 2022–2023 period, it is
highly unlikely that PM10 and PM10
precursor emissions would increase
significantly between 2022 and 2023 to
the extent it would jeopardize a
showing of maintenance for a 10-year
period after redesignation.
3. Fleet turnover supports a continued
gradual decrease in emission levels
beyond 2025. Specifically, California’s
Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program
sets gasoline and vehicle emissions
standards for passenger cars, light
trucks, and larger passenger vehicles.
The program was designed to reduce
emissions, including NOX, responsible
for the ozone and particulate matter
impacts from these vehicles. The LEV 2
standards were phased in between 2004
and 2010, have been replaced by the
LEV 3 standards adopted in 2012. The
LEV 3 standards represent a further
strengthening of the program and are
planned to be phased in between 2015
and 2025. Consequently, the full
emission reduction benefits from the
LEV 2 and 3 standards will not be
achieved until after 2022 and continue
beyond 2023.36 The relationship
36 2011 records from CARB’s inspection and
maintenance program indicate approximately 20%
of the fleet had not yet turned over after 15 years.
It is reasonable to assume that because the LEV 2
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
between the LEV standards and fleet
turnover is just one example of a
measure providing continued NOX
emissions reductions between 2022 and
2023 because of continued fleet
turnover.
4. Air quality concentrations are well
below the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, and,
when coupled with the emissions
inventory projections through 2022,
clearly show it would be very unlikely
for a PM10 violation to occur in 2023.
The Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area has not violated the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS since 1990. Air quality
concentrations for the three most recent
years (2009–2011) of complete, qualityassured, and certified ambient air
monitoring data show the highest
monitored PM10 concentration to be 76
mg/m3, approximately half of the PM10
NAAQS. The historical trend of the
maximum 24-hour PM10 peak
concentrations between 1989 and 2011
indicates a steady decline.37 As shown
in table 7, by 2022 PM10 precursor
emissions (NOX) will drop significantly
compared to 2008, and direct PM10
emissions will remain relatively flat.
The combination of the air quality
concentrations well below the standard
and the declining inventory as
described above indicate it is highly
unlikely that the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area will violate the 24hour PM10 NAAQS during the 2022 to
2023 period.
For the above reasons, EPA believes
the area will continue to maintain the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS at least through
2023 and that the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan shows maintenance
for a period of ten years following
redesignation. Thus, if EPA finalizes its
proposed approval of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan in 2013, it is
based on a showing, in accordance with
section 175A, that the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan provides for
maintenance for at least ten years after
redesignation.
3. Verification of Continued Attainment
In demonstrating maintenance,
continued attainment of the NAAQS can
be verified through operation of an
appropriate air quality monitoring
network. The Calcagni memorandum
states that the maintenance plan should
standards were not fully implemented until 2009,
the reductions from the program will continue
through 2023, which would represent the 14 years
of turnover affected by the LEV 2 standards. Thus,
it is reasonable to conclude reductions from fleet
turnover would continue even beyond 2023. To see
the report, go to: https://www.bar.ca.gov/
80_BARResources/04_Miscellaneous/
USEPA%202010%20Calendar%20Year.pdf.
37 See Sacramento PM
10 Maintenance Plan, Figure
3.3, page 3–7.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
contain provisions for continued
operation of air quality monitors that
will provide such verification. Calcagni
memorandum, p. 11. As discussed in
section V.A. of this document, PM10 is
currently monitored by SMAQMD (five
sites) and CARB (one site) within the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area. In
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
(see Plan, p. 7–1), SMAQMD indicates
its intention to continue operation of an
air quality monitoring network that
meets or exceeds the minimum
monitoring requirements and that
ambient PM10 concentrations will be
monitored appropriately to verify
continued attainment of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. The Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan also notes that a
review of the entire monitoring network
will be undertaken annually as required
by federal regulations.38 We find the
SMAQMD’s commitment for continued
ambient PM10 monitoring as set forth in
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
to be acceptable.
Second, the transportation conformity
process, which would require a
comparison of on-road motor vehicle
emissions that would occur under new
or amended regional transportation
plans and programs with the MVEBs in
the PM10 Maintenance Plan, represents
another means by which to verify
continued attainment of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS in Sacramento County.
See page 8–1 of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.
Lastly, while not cited in the Plan,
CARB and SMAQMD must inventory
emissions sources and report to EPA on
a periodic basis under 40 CFR part 51,
subpart A (‘‘Air Emissions Reporting
Requirements’’). These emissions
inventory updates will provide a third
way to evaluate emissions trends in the
area and thereby verify continued
attainment of the NAAQS. These
methods are sufficient for the purpose of
verifying continued attainment.
4. Contingency Provisions
Section 175A(d) of the Clean Air Act
requires that maintenance plans include
contingency provisions, as EPA deems
necessary, to promptly correct any
violations of the NAAQS that occur after
redesignation of the area. Such
provisions must include a requirement
that the State will implement all
measures with respect to the control of
the air pollutant concerned that were
contained in the SIP for the area before
redesignation of the area as an
attainment area. These contingency
provisions are distinguished from those
38 EPA’s requirements for annual review of
monitoring networks are found at 40 CFR 58.10.
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
generally required for nonattainment
areas under section 172(c)(9) in that
they are not required to be fully-adopted
measures that will take effect without
further action by the state in order for
the maintenance plan to be approved.
However, the contingency plan is
considered to be an enforceable part of
the SIP and should ensure that the
contingency measures are adopted
expeditiously once they are triggered by
a specified event.
Under section 175A(d), contingency
measures identified in the contingency
plan do not have to be fully adopted at
the time of redesignation. However, the
contingency plan is considered to be an
enforceable part of the SIP and should
ensure that the contingency measures
are adopted expeditiously once they are
triggered by a specified event. The
maintenance plan should clearly
identify the measures to be adopted, a
schedule and procedure for adoption
and implementation, and a specific
timeline for action by the State. As a
necessary part of the plan, the State
should also identify specific indicators
or triggers, which will be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented.
As required by section 175A of the
CAA, SMAQMD has adopted a
contingency plan to address possible
future PM10 air quality problems. The
contingency provisions in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan are
contained in section 7.3 of the Plan and
were clarified in a subsequent letter
from the District.39 After verification of
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS violation,
including allowing sufficient time for
sample weighing and processing,
SMAQMD commits to the following
steps.
(1) Examine the violation to
determine if it qualifies as a natural or
exceptional event.
(2) If the violation was not a natural
or exceptional event, SMAQMD will
analyze the event to determine its
plausible causes. Any applicable
emission reductions from already
adopted rules that have not yet been
implemented would be evaluated to
determine if these new emission
reductions would be sufficient to
prevent future PM10 exceedances. These
already adopted controls could include
CARB and SMAQMD PM2.5 and NOX
measures to address ozone and PM2.5
SIP requirements. In addition, the
SMAQMD would evaluate applicable
reasonably available control measures
(RACM) that could potentially provide
39 See letter, Larry Greene, Executive Officer,
SMAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 28, 2013.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
the corrective action needed. This
evaluation step will take no more than
18 months.
(3) If the additional emission
reductions from already adopted rules
are insufficient, the SMAQMD would
proceed with selecting specific RACM
measures for adoption and
implementation that would be
applicable to addressing the seasonal
PM10 problem. Appendix B in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
contains potential RACM measures to be
evaluated for future adoption and
implementation. This adoption and
implementation step will take no more
than 12 months.
In their June 28, 2013 letter,
SMAQMD clarified that all three of the
aforementioned steps will be completed,
including the implementation of
additional control measures, within 24
months.
Upon our review of the Plan, as
summarized above, we find that the
contingency provisions of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
clearly identify specific contingency
measures, contain tracking and
triggering mechanisms to determine
when contingency measures are needed,
contain a description of the process of
recommending and implementing
contingency measures, and contain
specific timelines for action. Thus, we
conclude that the contingency
provisions of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan are adequate to
ensure prompt correction of a violation
and therefore comply with section
175A(d) of the Act. For the reasons set
forth above, EPA is proposing to find
that the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan is consistent with the maintenance
plan contingency provision
requirements of the CAA and EPA
guidance.
5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan
Revisions
Section 175A(b) of the CAA provides
that eight years after redesignation, the
State must submit a revised
maintenance plan that demonstrates
continued attainment for the subsequent
ten-year period following the initial tenyear maintenance period. The
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
includes a SMAQMD commitment to
prepare and submit a revised
maintenance plan in 2020, seven years
after redesignation to attainment. See
page 6–7 of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.
In light of the discussion set forth
above, EPA is proposing to approve the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 175A.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44509
6. Transportation Conformity and Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets
a. Requirements for Transportation
Conformity and Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets
Under section 176(c) of the CAA,
transportation plans, programs and
projects in the nonattainment or
maintenance areas that are funded or
approved under title 23 U.S.C. and the
Federal Transit Laws (49 U.S.C. chapter
53) must conform to the applicable SIP.
In short, a transportation plan and
program are deemed to conform to the
applicable SIP if the emissions resulting
from the implementation of that
transportation plan and program are less
than or equal to the motor vehicle
emissions budgets (budgets) established
in the SIP for the attainment year,
maintenance year and other years. See,
generally, 40 CFR part 93 for the federal
conformity regulations and 40 CFR
93.118 specifically for how budgets are
used in conformity.
The budgets serve as a ceiling on
emissions that would result from an
area’s planned transportation system.
The budget concept is further explained
in the preamble to the November 24,
1993, transportation conformity rule (58
FR 62188). Maintenance plan submittals
must specify the maximum emissions of
transportation-related PM10 and NOX
emissions allowed in the last year of the
maintenance period, i.e., the motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs).
(MVEBs may also be specified for
additional years during the maintenance
period.) The submittal must also
demonstrate that these emissions levels,
when considered with emissions from
all other sources, are consistent with
maintenance of the NAAQS.
b. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan contains PM10 and NOX MVEBs for
the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area for 2008, 2012, and 2022. The
MVEBs are the on-road mobile source
primary PM10 and NOX (as a PM10
precursor) emissions for Sacramento
County for 2008, 2012 and 2022. The
MVEBs are compatible with the 2008,
2012, and 2022 on-road mobile source
PM10 and NOX emissions included in
SMAQMD’s 2008, 2012, and 2022 p.m.10
and NOX emission inventories, as
summarized above in tables 6, 7 and 8.
The derivation of the MVEBs is
thoroughly discussed in section 8 of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.40
40 Additional information associated with the
motor vehicle emission budget calculations is
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
Continued
24JYP1
44510
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
The motor vehicle emissions budgets for
Sacramento are summarized in table 9.
TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS (TONS PER
DAY, AVERAGE WINTER DAY) IN THE
SACRAMENTO PM10 MAINTENANCE
PLAN 41
Budget year
PM10
2008 ......................................
2012 ......................................
2022 ......................................
NOX
15
15
17
50
38
19
this instance, the safety margin has been
explicitly quantified and shown to be
consistent with continued maintenance
of the PM10 NAAQS through the
applicable maintenance period, through
2023. The MVEBs incorporate: (1) Onroad motor vehicle emission inventory
factors of EMFAC2007 43 and AP–42; 44
and (2) updated recent vehicle activity
data from Sacramento Area Council of
Governments’ Sacramento ActivityBased Travel Demand Simulation Model
transportation modeling system.
The details for each component of the
budgets are shown in table 10 and are
comprised of direct on-road mobile
source emissions, road construction
emissions, fugitive emissions from
paved and unpaved roads, and safety
margins. A state may choose to apply a
safety margin under our transportation
conformity rule so long as such margins
are explicitly quantified in the
applicable plan and are shown to be
consistent with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS (whichever
is relevant to the particular plan).42 In
TABLE 10—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND EMISSIONS COMPRISING THE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS (TONS PER
DAY, AVERAGE WINTER DAY) IN THE SACRAMENTO PM10 MAINTENANCE PLAN 45
2008
2012
2022
Category
NOX
Direct Exhaust a ...............................................................
Paved Road Dust .............................................................
Unpaved Road Dust ........................................................
Road Construction Dust ...................................................
Safety Margin 46 ...............................................................
PM10
NOX
49.6
....................
....................
....................
....................
2.2
6.1
3.6
2.7
....................
37.6
....................
....................
....................
....................
Totals (rounded up to nearest ton) ..................................
a Direct
50
15
PM10
NOX
2.1
4.9
3.6
2.8
1.3
38
15
PM10
18.1
....................
....................
....................
....................
19
2.1
5.5
3.6
2.8
2.5
17
Exhaust includes PM10 from tire and brake wear.
demonstration. The technical analysis
showed that the updated paved road
emissions provided safety margins in
2012 and 2022 as compared to the
attainment inventory emissions of
paved road dust which was used in
establishing the MVEBs in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.47
Therefore, the total MVEBs are
consistent with maintenance of the
standard.
As described earlier, the budgets were
developed using emission factors
generated by CARB’s EMFAC2007
model and AP–42. The paved road
emissions were originally calculated
using the 2006 version of AP–42 by
estimating the 2008 paved road
emissions and projecting them to 2012
and 2022. The calculation relied on a
California profile of silt loading,
weather, and growth in roadway
centerline miles.
EPA released an update to
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP–42) in January of 2011,
which revised the equation for
estimating paved road dust emissions
based on an updated regression that
included new emission tests results.
CARB staff conducted an additional
technical analysis of the Sacramento
County paved road emission projections
using the updated AP–42 equation and
growth in vehicle miles traveled, to
ensure that the motor vehicle emission
budgets were still consistent with the
currently approved modeling tools and
data and the maintenance
EPA is proposing to approve the
MVEBs for 2008, 2012 and 2022 as part
of our approval of Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan. EPA has determined
that the MVEB emission targets are
consistent with emission control
measures in the SIP and that
Sacramento County can maintain
attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Because the budgets EPA found
provided in a technical analysis accompanying June
2013 letters from ARB and SMAQMD to EPA.
41 See Table 8.1, page 8–4 of the Sacramento PM
10
Maintenance Plan.
42 See 40 CFR 93.124(a).
43 EMFAC (EMission FACtor) is California’s
model for estimating emissions from on-road
vehicles operating in California. EPA approved
EMFAC2007 on January 18, 2008 (73 FR 3464).
CARB’s latest release is EMFAC 2011 which EPA
approved on March 6, 2013 (78 FR 14533) was not
approved when this plan was developed.
44 AP–42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, is a document published by EPA as the
primary collection of EPA approved emission factor
information. The emission factors have been
developed and compiled from source test data,
material balance studies, and engineering estimates.
EPA has publishes supplements and updates to the
each of the chapters available in Volume I,
Stationary Point and Area Sources at the following
Web site: https://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/.
45 Ibid.
46 The Sacramento PM
10 Maintenance Plan
includes PM10 MVEB safety margins of 1.3 tons per
day (tpd) for 2012 and 2.4 tpd for 2022. This
additional increase may be needed for the
Sacramento Area Council of Governments to make
a transportation conformity determinations,
including for a horizon year of 2035 or later for
transportation planning purposes when using the
latest year of motor vehicle emissions budgets
(2022) in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
See letter, Larry Greene, Executive Officer,
SMAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 28, 2013.
Also see letter, Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive
Officer, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 13, 2013.
47 See letter, Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive
Officer, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 13, 2013.
See Letter, Larry Greene, Executive Director/Air
Pollution Control Officer, SMAQMD, to Deborah
Jordan, Director Air Division, US EPA, Region 9,
dated June 28, 2013.
c. Initial Adequacy Review of Budgets
On September 1, 2011, EPA
announced the availability of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
with MVEBs and a 30-day public
comment period on EPA’s Adequacy
Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/
reg9sips.htm#ca. The comment period
for this notification ended on October 3,
2011, and EPA received no comments
from the public. On November 23, 2011,
EPA published in the Federal Register
(76 FR 72404) a finding of adequacy for
the PM10 MVEBs for the years 2008,
2012, and 2022.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
d. Updated Technical Review
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
e. Proposed Actions on the Budgets
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
adequate in 2011 are the same budgets
EPA is proposing to approve in this
action, if EPA approves the MVEBs in
the final rulemaking action, it would not
change the budgets currently in use for
future transportation conformity
determinations for Sacramento County.
As discussed in section V.D.2.a of this
notice, EPA is proposing that if this
approval is finalized in 2013 the area
will continue to maintain the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS through at least 2023.
Consistent with this proposal, EPA is
proposing to approve the MVEBs
submitted by the State in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
EPA is proposing that the submitted
budgets, when combined with EPA’s
additional analysis for the 2022–2023
time period, are consistent with
maintenance of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS through 2023.
VI. Proposed Action and Request for
Public Comment
Based on our review of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
submitted by the State, air quality
monitoring data, and other relevant
materials, EPA is proposing to find that
the State has addressed all the necessary
requirements for redesignation of the
Sacramento nonattainment area to
attainment of the PM10 NAAQS,
pursuant to CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)
and 175A.
First, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D),
we are proposing to approve CARB’s
request, which accompanied the
submittal of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan, to redesignate the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area to
attainment for the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS. We are doing so based on our
conclusion that the area has met the five
criteria for redesignation under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion is
based on our proposed determination
that the area has attained the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS; that relevant portions of
the California SIP are fully approved;
that the improvement in air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions; that California
has met all requirements applicable to
the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area with respect to section 110 and part
D of the CAA; and is based on our
proposed approval of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan as part of this
action.
Second, in connection with the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan and
EPA’s analysis showing maintenance
through 2023, EPA finds that the
maintenance demonstration showing
how the area will continue to attain the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS for 10 years
beyond redesignation (i.e., through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:33 Jul 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
2023) and the contingency provisions
describing the actions that SMAQMD
will take in the event of a future
monitored violation meet all applicable
requirements for maintenance plans and
related contingency provisions in
section 175A of the CAA. EPA is also
proposing to approve the motor vehicle
emissions budgets in the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan because we find
they meet the applicable transportation
conformity requirements under 40 CFR
93.118(e). Lastly, EPA is proposing to
approve the 2008 inventory, which
serves as the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan’s attainment year
inventory, as satisfying the requirements
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.
We are soliciting comments on these
proposed actions. We will accept
comments from the public on this
proposal for 30 days following
publication of this proposal in the
Federal Register. We will consider these
comments before taking final action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by State law. Redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, 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, these
actions merely propose to approve a
State plan and redesignation request as
meeting federal requirements and do not
impose additional requirements beyond
those by State law. For these reasons,
these proposed actions:
• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
44511
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not a significant regulatory
action subject to Executive Order 13211
(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to 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. In addition, there are no
federally recognized tribes located
within the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 12, 2013.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013–17825 Filed 7–23–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM
24JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 24, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44494-44511]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17825]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0877; FRL-9837-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of
Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of California;
PM10; Redesignation of Sacramento to Attainment; Approval of
PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for
Sacramento
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, as a revision of the California
state implementation plan, the State's request to redesignate the
Sacramento nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour particulate
matter of ten microns or less (PM10) National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA is also proposing to approve the
PM10 maintenance plan and the associated motor vehicle
emissions budgets for use in transportation conformity determinations
necessary for the Sacramento area. Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
the attainment year emissions inventory. EPA is proposing these actions
because the SIP revision meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act
and EPA guidance for such plans and motor vehicle emissions budgets.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R09-OAR-2012-0877, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: John Ungvarsky (AIR-2), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901. Deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's
normal hours of operation.
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
[[Page 44495]]
should not be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov or email.
https://www.regulations.gov 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 email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment 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 and documents in the docket for
this action are generally available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket
are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material,
large maps), and some may not be publicly available in 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-
3963, ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Today's Proposed Action
II. Background
A. The PM10 NAAQS
B. PM10 Planning Requirements
III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submittal of SIP
Revisions
IV. Substantive Requirements for Redesignation
V. Evaluation of the State's Redesignation Request for the
Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area
A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the PM10
NAAQS.
B. The Area Must Have a Fully-Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Clean Air Act Section
110 and Part D
1. Basic SIP Requirements under Section 110
2. SIP Requirements under Part D
C. EPA Has Determined That the Improvement in Air Quality is Due
to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under
Clean Air Act Section 175A
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Verification of Continued Attainment
4. Contingency Provisions
5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
6. Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Today's Proposed Action
Under Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act'') section 107(d)(3)(D), EPA
is proposing to approve the State's request to redesignate the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-
hour PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or
``standard''). We are doing so based on our conclusion that the area
has met the five criteria for redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E): (1) That the area has attained the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS in the 2010-2012 time period and that the area
continues to attain the PM10 standard since that time; (2)
that relevant portions of the California state implementation plan
(SIP) are fully approved; (3) that the improvement in air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions; (4) that
California has met all requirements applicable to the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area with respect to section 110 and part
D of the CAA; and (5) that the PM10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and
Redesignation Request for Sacramento County (October 28, 2010)
(``Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan'' or ``Plan'') \1\ meets
the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, to Jared
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, dated December 7,
2010, with attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, under CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan including the motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) in the 2008 Sacramento PM10 Plan as a
revision to the California SIP because we find the MVEBs meet the
applicable transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR
93.118(e). EPA finds that the maintenance demonstration shows how the
area will continue to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for at
least 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e., through 2023) and that the
contingency provisions describing the actions that the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) will take in the
event of a future monitored violation meet all applicable requirements
for maintenance plans and related contingency provisions in CAA section
175A. Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the attainment year
emissions inventory under CAA section 172(c)(3).
EPA is proposing these actions because the SIP revision meets the
requirements of the CAA and EPA guidance for such plans and budgets.
II. Background
A. The PM10 NAAQS
EPA sets the NAAQS for certain ambient air pollutants at levels
required to protect public health and welfare. Particulate matter with
an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal ten
micrometers, or PM10, is one of these ambient air pollutants
for which EPA has established health-based standards.
EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter on July 1, 1987 (52 FR
24633), replacing standards for total suspended particulates (TSP less
than 30 microns in diameter) with new standards applying only to
particulate matter up to 10 microns in diameter (PM10). At
that time, EPA established two PM10 standards, an annual
standard and a 24-hour standard.
In an October 17, 2006 p.m. NAAQS revision, the 24-hour
PM10 standards were retained but the annual standards were
revoked effective December 18, 2006. 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). On
January 15, 2013, EPA announced that it was again retaining the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS as a 24-hour standard of 150 micrograms per cubic
meter (ug/m\3\). See 78 FR 3086. This SIP submittal addresses the 24-
hour PM10 standard as originally promulgated in 1987 and
reaffirmed on January 15, 2013. An area attains the 24-hour
PM10 standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m\3\)
when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour
concentration in excess of the standard (referred to as an exceedance),
is equal to or less than one.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ An exceedance is defined as a daily value that is above the
level of the 24-hour standard, 150 [mu]g/m\3\, after rounding to the
nearest 10 [mu]g/m\3\ (i.e., values ending in five or greater are to
be rounded up). Thus, a recorded value of 154 [mu]g/m\3\ would not
be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 150 [mu]g/m\3\;
whereas, a recorded value of 155 [mu]g/m\3\ would be an exceedance
since it would be rounded to 160 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix K, section 1.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. PM10 Planning Requirements
Effective January 20, 1994, EPA designated Sacramento County as a
moderate nonattainment area for the PM10 NAAQS. See 58 FR
67334 (December, 21, 1993). The designation, classification, and
boundaries of the Sacramento nonattainment area are codified at 40 CFR
81.305.
[[Page 44496]]
Beginning in the 1970's and continuing to the present, the SMAQMD
\3\ and CARB have adopted a number of rules and prepared a number of
nonattainment plans to address planning requirements under the CAA, as
amended in 1977. CARB submitted these rules and plans to EPA at various
times, and EPA approved a number of them into the California SIP.
Examples of rules adopted by SMAQMD and approved by EPA as revisions to
the California SIP as part of the PM10 control strategy in
the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area include: Rule 403--
Fugitive Dust; Rule 405--Dust and Condensed Fumes; Rule 412--Stationary
Source Internal Combustion Engines at Major Stationary Sources of
NOX; and Rule 414--Natural Gas Fired Water Heaters. Examples
of rules adopted by CARB and approved by EPA as revisions to the
California SIP that have reduced PM10 in the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area include: California Code of
Regulations (CCR) Title 13, Section 1956.8--Heavy Duty Vehicle Exhaust
Emission Standards; CCR, Section 2262--California Reformulated Gasoline
Phase 2 and Phase 3 Standards; and CCR, Sections 2420-2427--Heavy Duty
Diesel Cycle Engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In 1990, the Sacramento County Air Pollution Control
District changed its name to the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 15, 2002, EPA determined under section 179(c) of the
CAA that the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area had attained
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS by its December 31, 2000 attainment
date, based on complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air
monitoring data that showed the area monitored attainment of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS for 1998-2000. (67 FR 7082). Because EPA
determined that the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area met
its attainment date, no PM10 serious nonattainment area
requirements apply in the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area. In this action, we are updating the determination of attainment
to account for PM10 monitoring data since 2001, including
more recent years consistent with the applicable criterion for
redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i).
On December 7, 2010, CARB submitted the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan and requested that EPA redesignate the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. We are proposing action today on CARB's December
7, 2010 submittal, including the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan and redesignation request.
III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submittal of SIP
Revisions
Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(l) of the Act require states to provide
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption of SIP
revisions. In this action, we are proposing action on CARB's December
7, 2010 submittal of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan,
dated October 28, 2010, as a revision to the California SIP. The
submittal documents the public review process followed by SMAQMD and
CARB in adopting the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan prior
to submittal to EPA as a revision to the California SIP. The
documentation provides evidence that reasonable notice of a public
hearing was provided to the public and that a public hearing was
conducted prior to adoption.
CARB's submittal includes a letter dated October 28, 2010 from
Larry Greene, Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer to the
Board of Directors for the SMAQMD. In addition, Enclosure 1, Attachment
3 of CARB's submittal includes a copy of the notice to the public
published on September 27, 2010, announcing a public hearing to be held
on October 28, 2010. These materials document the public review process
followed by SMAQMD in adopting the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan prior to transmittal to CARB and provide evidence that
reasonable notice of a public hearing was provided to the public and
that a public hearing was conducted prior to adoption. Specifically,
the notice for the Board hearing was published in the Sacramento Bee, a
newspaper of general circulation, on September 27, 2010 and sent to
over 2000 email addresses. The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan was also made available for viewing on the District's Web site and
at the District office on and after September 27, 2010.
Enclosure I, Attachment 1 of CARB's submittal documents the
adoption of the Sacramento PM10 Plan by the SMAQMD Board of
Directors. On October 28, 2010, the SMAQMD Board of Directors approved
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan and directed SMAQMD
staff to forward the Plan to CARB, the Governor of California's
designee for SIP matters.
Enclosure IV of CARB's submittal documents CARB's board resolution
regarding the Sacramento PM10 Plan. On December 7, 2010,
CARB submitted the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan to EPA
for approval as a revision to the California SIP.
Based on the documentation included in CARB's submittal, we find
that the submittal of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
as a SIP revision satisfies the procedural requirements of sections
110(l) of the Act for revising SIPs.
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 we have not affirmatively determined to be
complete or incomplete will become complete six months after the day of
submittal by operation of law. A completeness review allows us to
determine if the submittal includes all the necessary items and
information we need to act on it.
We make completeness determinations using criteria we have
established in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. These criteria fall into two
categories: administrative information and technical support
information. The administrative information provides documentation that
the State has followed basic administrative procedures during the SIP-
adoption process and thus we have a legally-adopted SIP revision in
front of us. The technical support information provides us the
information we need to determine the impact of the proposed revision on
attainment and maintenance of the air quality standards.
We notify a state of our completeness determination by letter
unless the submittal becomes complete by operation of law. A finding of
completeness does not approve the submittal as part of the SIP nor does
it indicate that the submittal is approvable. It does start a 12-month
clock for EPA to act on the SIP submittal. See CAA section 110(k)(2).
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan became complete by
operation of law on June 7, 2011.
IV. Substantive Requirements for Redesignation
The CAA establishes the requirements for redesignation of a
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E)
allows for redesignation provided that the following criteria are met:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2)
EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area
under section 110(k); (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP, applicable federal
air pollution control regulations, and other permanent and
[[Page 44497]]
enforceable reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan
for the area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and (5)
the State containing such area has met all requirements applicable to
the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
EPA provided guidance on redesignations in a document entitled,
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' published in the
Federal Register on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070) (referred to herein as the ``General
Preamble''). Other relevant EPA guidance documents include:
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
September 4, 1992 (referred to herein as the ``Calcagni memorandum'');
``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994 (Nichols memorandum); and ``State Implementation Plans for Serious
PM10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for
PM10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General
Preamble for the Implementation of title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994) (PM10
Addendum).
In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA applies these policies to
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, taking into
consideration the specific factual issues presented. For the reasons
set forth below in section V of this document, we propose to approve
CARB's request for redesignation of the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
based on our conclusion that all of the criteria under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) have been satisfied.
V. Evaluation of the State's Redesignation Request for the Sacramento
PM10 Nonattainment Area
A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the PM10 NAAQS
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) states that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, EPA must determine that the area has
attained the relevant NAAQS. In this case, the relevant NAAQS is the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Generally, EPA determines whether an area's air quality is meeting
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS based upon complete,\4\ quality-
assured, and certified data gathered at established state and local air
monitoring stations (SLAMS) in the nonattainment area and entered into
the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database. Data from air monitors
operated by state, local, or tribal agencies in compliance with EPA
monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS. These monitoring
agencies certify annually that these data are accurate to the best of
their knowledge. Accordingly, EPA relies primarily on data in AQS when
determining the attainment status of an area. See 40 CFR 50.6; 40 CFR
part 50, appendices J and K; 40 CFR part 53; and, 40 CFR part 58,
appendices A, C, D, and E.\5\ EPA will also consider air quality data
from other air monitoring stations in the nonattainment area provided
those stations meet the federal monitoring requirements for SLAMS,
including the quality assurance and quality control criteria in 40 CFR
part 58, appendix A. See 40 CFR 58.14 (2006) and 58.20 (2007); \6\ 71
FR 61236, 61242; (October 17, 2006). All valid data are reviewed to
determine the area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part
50, appendix K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For PM10, a complete set of data includes a
minimum of 75 percent of the scheduled PM10 samples per
quarter. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section 2.3(a).
\5\ Because the annual PM10 standard was revoked
effective December 18, 2006, this document discusses only attainment
of the 24-hour PM10 standard. See 71 FR 61144; (October
17, 2006).
\6\ EPA promulgated amendments to the ambient air monitoring
regulations in 40 CFR parts 53 and 58 on October 17, 2006. (See 71
FR 61236.) The requirements for Special Purpose Monitors were
revised and moved from 40 CFR 58.14 to 40 CFR 58.20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment of the 24-hour PM10 standard is determined by
calculating the expected number of exceedances of the standard in a
year. The 24-hour PM10 standard is attained when the
expected number of exceedances averaged over a three-year period is
less than or equal to one at each monitoring site within the
nonattainment area. Generally, three consecutive years of air quality
data are required to show attainment of the 24-hour PM10
standard. See 40 CFR part 50 and appendix K.
To demonstrate attainment of the 24-hour PM10 standard
at a monitoring site, the monitor must provide sufficient data to
perform the required calculations in 40 CFR part 50, appendix K. The
amount of data required varies with the sampling frequency, data
capture rate, and the number of years of record. For PM10, a
``complete'' set of data includes a minimum of 75 percent of the
scheduled PM10 samples per quarter. See 40 CFR part 50,
appendix K, section 2.3(a). In all cases, three years of representative
monitoring data that meet the 75 percent criterion should be utilized,
if available. More than three years may be considered if all additional
representative years of data meeting the 75 percent criterion are
utilized. Data not meeting these criteria may also suffice to show
attainment; however, such exceptions must be approved by the
appropriate Regional Administrator in accordance with EPA guidance. See
40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 2.3.
In the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area, the agencies
responsible for assuring that the area meets air quality monitoring
requirements include CARB and SMAQMD. Both CARB and SMAQMD submit
annual monitoring network plans to EPA. SMAQMD network plans describe
the monitoring network operated by SMAQMD and CARB in Sacramento
County, and CARB's network plans describe the monitoring sites CARB
operates. These plans discuss the status of the air monitoring network,
as required under 40 CFR 58.10.
EPA regularly reviews these annual plans for compliance with the
applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With respect to
PM10, EPA has found that the area's network plans, submitted
by CARB and SMAQMD, meet the applicable requirements under 40 CFR part
58. See EPA letters to CARB and SMAQMD approving their annual network
plans for years 2010, 2011, and 2012.7 8 EPA also concluded
from its
[[Page 44498]]
Technical System Audit of the CARB Primary Quality Assurance
Organization (PQAO) (conducted during the summer of 2011), that the
combined ambient air monitoring network operated by CARB and the local
air districts in their PQAO (which includes SMAQMD) currently meets or
exceeds the requirements for the minimum number of SLAMS for
PM10 in the Sacramento nonattainment area.\9\ CARB annually
certifies that the data it submits to AQS are complete and quality-
assured.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality
Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB (October
29, 2010) (approving CARB's ``2010 Annual Monitoring Network Plan
for the Small Districts in California''); Letter from Matthew Lakin,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Karen
Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical
Support Division, CARB (November 1, 2011) (approving CARB's ``2011
Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the Small Districts in
California''); Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality
Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air
Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB
(April 19, 2013) (approving CARB's ``2012 Annual Monitoring Report
for the Small Districts in California'').
\8\ Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Larry Greene, Air Pollution Control
Officer, SMAQMD (November 1, 2010) (approving the ``Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District's 2010 Annual
Monitoring Network Plan''); Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Larry Greene, Air
Pollution Control Officer, SMAQMD (October 31, 2011) (approving the
``Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District's 2011
Annual Monitoring Network Plan''); Letter from Matthew Lakin,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Larry
Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer, SMAQMD (March 1, 2013)
(approving the ``Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District's 2012 Annual Monitoring Network Plan'').
\9\ See letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, U.S.
EPA Region IX, to James Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
transmitting ``System Audit of the Ambient Monitoring Program:
California Resources Board, June-September: 2011,'' with enclosure,
October 22, 2012.
\10\ See, e.g., letter from Sylvia Vanderspek, Chief, Air
Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB,
to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX,
certifying calendar year 2012 ambient air quality data and quality
assurance data, May 16, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are two types of PM10 monitors used throughout the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area monitoring network: the
Federal Reference Method (FRM) filter-based high-volume size-selective
inlet sampler (hi-vols or SSI), and the Federal Equivalent Method (FEM)
tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM), which measures
PM10 on a continuous basis. The schedule for PM10
sample collection is one in six days for the FRM filter-based high
volume samplers, while the FEM TEOM monitors operate on a daily 24-hour
schedule.
There were six PM10 monitoring sites within the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area in calendar years 2010,
2011, and 2012. SMAQMD operates five of the monitoring sites:
Goldenland Court, North Highlands, Del Paso Manor, Branch Center Rd
2, and Stockton Blvd. CARB operates the T Street monitoring
site. FRM filter-based high-volume samplers are located at all of the
six sites listed above. Del Paso Manor and the Stockton Blvd. utilize
both the FRM filter-based samplers and FEM TEOM monitors.\11\ EPA
defines specific monitoring site types and spatial scales of
representativeness to characterize the nature and location of required
monitors. For the six sites, the spatial scale is neighborhood scale,
and the monitoring objective is population exposure, except the T
Street site, which has a monitoring objective of highest
concentration.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ A map of the locations of Sacramento County monitoring
stations is found in Figure 3.2 of the Sacramento PM10
Plan.
\12\ See footnotes 7 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA
has reviewed the quality-assured, and certified PM10 ambient
air monitoring data as recorded in AQS for the applicable monitoring
period collected at the monitoring sites in the Sacramento
nonattainment area and determined that the data are complete.
Table 1 summarizes the site-specific highest 24-hour
PM10 concentrations for the period of 2001-2012. As shown in
Table 1, only one of the highest concentrations exceeded the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS standard of 150 [micro]g/m\3\. Table 2 summarizes
the expected number of exceedances occurring over three-year periods
dating back to EPA's previous clean data determination. See 67 FR 7082
(February 15, 2002). The 24-hour PM10 standard is attained
when the expected number of exceedances averaged over a three-year
period is less than or equal to one at each monitoring site within the
nonattainment area. The highest value in Table 2 is 0.3 exceedances
over a three-year period, and the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area did not violate the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
during the 2001-2012 period. Therefore, we are proposing to determine,
based on the complete, quality-assured data for three most recent years
(2010-2012) that the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area has
attained the 24-hour PM10 standard. There are six
PM10 monitors currently operating in the nonattainment area.
Preliminary SLAMS data for 2013 from these monitors are also consistent
with continued attainment.
Table 1--Summary of Highest 24-hour PM10 Concentrations ([micro]g/m3) From Ambient Data Collected Within the Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area, 2001-
2012.a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highest concentration ([micro]g/m\3\)
Site AQS Monitor ID -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Highlands-Blackfoot........................ 06-067-0002-1 64 53 62 44 110 65 56 97 33 48 65 34
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor........................ 06-067-0006-1 68 86 53 38 71 63 70 71 45 44 62 41
06-067-0006-3 65 43 43 101 49 132 66 92 39 19 NA NA
Branch Center Road 1 \b\................ 06-067-0283-1 78 77 75 45 61 38 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Branch Center Road 2 \b\................ 06-067-0284-1 NA NA NA NA NA 81 56 89 76 62 69 60
Sacramento-Airport Road \c\...................... 06-067-0013-1 73 144 NA 35 56 90 94 71 NA NA NA NA
06-067-0013-2 51 73 57 47 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Sacramento Health Dept.-Stockton Blvd............ 06-067-4001-2 58 85 53 44 64 56 56 88 45 45 60 34
06-067-4001-3 122 103 73 91 70 159 51 92 44 50 73 37
Sacramento-Goldenland Court \c\.................. 06-067-0014-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 56 48 42 63 32
06-067-0014-3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 55 69 76
Sacramento-T Street.............................. 06-067-0010-1 89 77 65 58 53 109 53 73 47 53 38 36
06-067-0010-2 73 86 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
06-067-0010-3 48 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The data in this table are from AQS QuickLook Reports dated January 10, 2013 and June 7, 2013.
\b\ The Branch Center Road 1 monitor was replaced by the Branch Center Road 2 monitor, located .25 mi to the north, in early 2006.
\c\ The Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA: data are not available.
[[Page 44499]]
Table 2--Summary of Expected Exceedances 3-yr Average From Ambient Data Collected within the Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area, 2001-2012.\a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expected Exceedances 3-yr Average
Site name Site (AQS Monitor -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ID) 1999-2001 2000-2002 2001-2003 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Highlands-Blackfoot................ 06-067-0002-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor................ 06-067-0006-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06-067-0006-3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Branch Center Road 1 \b\........ 06-067-0283-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA
Branch Center Road 2 \b\........ 06-067-0284-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sacramento-Airport Road \c\.............. 06-067-0013-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA
06-067-0013-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Sacramento Health Dept.-Stockton Blvd.... 06-067-4001-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06-067-4001-3 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0
Sacramento-Goldenland Court \c\.......... 06-067-0014-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0 0 0
06-067-0014-3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0 0 0
Sacramento-T Street...................... 06-067-0010-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06-067-0010-2 0 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
06-067-0010-3 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The data in this table are from AQS QuickLook Reports dated January 10, 2013 and June 7, 2013.
\b\ The Branch Center Road 1 monitor was replaced by the Branch Center Road 2 monitor, located .25 mi to the north, in early 2006.
\c\ The Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA: data are not available.
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Clean Air Act Section
110 and Part D
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) require EPA to determine that the
area has a fully approved applicable SIP under section 110(k) that
meets all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D for the
purposes of redesignation.
1. Basic SIP Requirements Under Section 110
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following: submittal of
a SIP that has been adopted by the State after reasonable public notice
and hearing; provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; implementation of a
source permit program; provision for the implementation of part C
requirements for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
provisions; provisions for the implementation of part D requirements
for nonattainment new source review (nonattainment NSR) NSR permit
programs; provisions for air pollution modeling; and provisions for
public and local agency participation in planning and emission control
rule development.
We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). The section 110 (and part D)
requirements that are linked to a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. Requirements that apply regardless
of the designation of any particular area on the State are not
applicable requirements for the purposes of redesignation, and the
State will remain subject to these requirements after the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment.
For example, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain
certain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in another state, known as
``transport SIPs.'' Because the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
transport SIPs are not linked to a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification but rather apply regardless of the
attainment status, these are not applicable requirements for the
purposes of redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E).
Similarly, EPA believes that other section 110 (and part D)
requirements that are not linked to nonattainment plan submissions or
to an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. EPA believes that the section 110 (and part
D) requirements that relate to a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This view is consistent with EPA's
existing policy on applicability of the conformity SIP requirement for
redesignations. See discussion in 75 FR 36023, 36026 (June 24, 2010).
On numerous occasions, CARB and SMAQMD have submitted and we have
approved provisions addressing the basic CAA section 110 provisions.
The Sacramento portion of the California SIP \13\ contains enforceable
emission limitations; requires monitoring, compiling and analyzing of
ambient air quality data; requires preconstruction review of new or
modified stationary sources; provides for adequate funding,
[[Page 44500]]
staff, and associated resources necessary to implement its
requirements; and provides the necessary assurances that the State
maintains responsibility for ensuring that the CAA requirements are
satisfied in the event that Sacramento is unable to meet its CAA
obligations. There are no outstanding or disapproved applicable SIP
submittals with respect to the Sacramento portion of the SIP that
prevent redesignation of the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area for the 24-hour PM10 standard. Therefore, we propose to
conclude that CARB and SMAQMD have met all SIP requirements for
Sacramento applicable for purposes of redesignation under section 110
of the CAA (General SIP Requirements).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Sacramento's portion of the California SIP may be found at
https://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/Casips?readform&count=100&state=California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. SIP Requirements Under Part D
Subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title 1 of the CAA contain air quality
planning requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas. Subpart
1 contains general requirements for all nonattainment areas of any
pollutant, including PM10, governed by a NAAQS. The subpart
1 requirements include, among other things, provisions for the
reasonable available control measures (RACM), reasonable further
progress (RFP), emissions inventories, contingency measures, and
conformity. Subpart 4 contains specific planning and scheduling
requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas. Section 189(a),
(c), and (e) requirements apply specifically to moderate
PM10 nonattainment areas and include: (1) An approved permit
program for construction of new and modified major stationary sources;
(2) provisions for RACM; (3) an attainment demonstration; (4)
quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by the
applicable attainment date; and (5) provisions to ensure that the
control requirements applicable to major stationary sources of
PM10 also apply to major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors except where the Administrator has
determined that such sources do not contribute significantly to
PM10 levels that exceed the NAAQS in the area.
As noted above, in 2002, EPA determined that the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area attained the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS based on 1998-2000 data. (67 FR 7082, February 15, 2002). In
accordance with EPA's Clean Data Policy, we have determined that the
following requirements do not apply to the State for so long as
Sacramento continues to attain the PM10 standard or until
the area is redesignated to attainment: an attainment demonstration
under section 189(a)(1)(B); RACM provisions under sections 172(c) and
189(a)(1)(C); reasonable further progress provisions under section
189(c)(1); and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). For other
rulemaking actions applying the Clean Data Policy in the context of
PM10, see 77 FR 31271-72 (proposed Determination of
Attainment for Paul Spur/Douglas, Arizona); 76 FR 10821-22 (proposed
Determination of Attainment for Truckee Meadows, Nevada); 75 FR 13712-
14 (proposed Determination of Attainment for Coso Junction,
California); 75 FR 36027 (proposed Redesignation for Coso Junction,
California); 73 FR 22313 (proposed Redesignation for San Joaquin
Valley). See also, 40 CFR 51.918.
Moreover, in the context of evaluating the area's eligibility for
redesignation, there is a separate and additional justification for
finding that requirements associated with attainment are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. Prior to and independently of the Clean
Data Policy, and specifically in the context of redesignations, EPA
interpreted attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for
purposes of redesignation. In the General Preamble, ``General Preamble
for the Interpretation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990,'' (General Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992), EPA
stated: [t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are directed at ensuring
RFP and attainment by the applicable date. These requirements no longer
apply when an area has attained the standard and is eligible for
redesignation. Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance plans * * *
provides specific requirements for contingency measures that
effectively supersede the requirements of section 172(c)(9) for these
areas. See also Calcagni memorandum at 6 (``The requirements for
reasonable further progress and other measures needed for attainment
will not apply for redesignations because they only have meaning for
areas not attaining the standard.''). Thus, even if the requirements
associated with attainment had not previously been suspended, they
would not apply for purposes of evaluating whether an area that has
attained the standard qualifies for redesignation. EPA has enunciated
this position since the General Preamble was published more than twenty
years ago, and it represents the Agency's interpretation of what
constitutes applicable requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E). The
Courts have recognized the scope of EPA's authority to interpret
``applicable requirements'' in the redesignation context. See Sierra
Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir.2004).
The remaining applicable Part D requirements for moderate
PM10 areas are: (1) An emission inventory under section
172(c) (3); (2) a permit program for the construction and operation of
new and modified major stationary sources of PM10 under
sections 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A); (3) control requirements for major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors under section 189(e),
except where the Administrator determines that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels that exceed the
standard in the area; (4) requirements under section 172(c)(7) that
meet the applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2); and (5) provisions
to ensure that federally supported or funded projects conform to the
air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP under section 176(c).
We discuss each of these requirements below.
Emissions Inventory
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of relevant PM10 pollutants for
the baseline year from all sources within the nonattainment area. The
inventory is to address direct and secondary PM10 emissions,
and all stationary (generally referring to larger stationary source or
``point'' sources), area (generally referring to smaller stationary and
fugitive sources), and mobile (on-road, nonroad, locomotive and
aircraft) sources are to be included in the inventory. We interpret the
Act such that the emission inventory requirements of section 172(c)(3)
are satisfied by the inventory requirements of the maintenance plan.
See 57 FR 13498, at 13564 (April 16, 1992). Thus, EPA is proposing to
approve the attainment inventories submitted as part of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan as satisfying the requirements of
sections 172(c)(3) for the purposes of redesignation of the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. The attainment inventories are described in
V.D.1 of this notice.
Permits for New and Modified Major Stationary Sources
CAA Sections 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A) require the State to submit
SIP revisions that establish certain requirements for new or modified
stationary sources in nonattainment areas, including provisions to
ensure that major new sources or major modifications of existing
sources of
[[Page 44501]]
nonattainment pollutants incorporate the highest level of control,
referred to as the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER), and that
increases in emissions from such stationary sources are offset so as to
provide for reasonable further progress towards attainment in the
nonattainment area. The process for reviewing permit applications and
issuing permits for new or modified stationary sources in nonattainment
areas is referred to as ``nonattainment New Source Review''
(nonattainment NSR).
EPA has previously approved SMAQMD Rule 203 (Prevention of
Significant Deterioration) and partially approved and partially
disapproved SMAQMD Rule 214 (Federal New Source Review). 76 FR 43183
(July 20, 2011). Because of the partial disapproval, SMAQMD does not
currently have a fully-approved nonattainment NSR program.
The NSR deficiencies identified in EPA's partial approval and
partial disapproval of Rule 214 are limited to the following issues:
(1) A small number of definitions: ``begin actual construction,''
``federally enforceable,'' and ``necessary preconstruction approvals or
permits''; (2) the rule is missing adequate public notice requirements
for minor sources; (3) the rule is missing provisions meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii) and 40 CFR 51.307(b)(2); and
(4) the rule contains a cross reference to Rule 207--Title V--Federal
Operating Permit Program, which is not SIP approved. The limited
disapproval triggered an obligation on EPA to promulgate a federal
implementation plan (FIP) to remedy the NSR deficiencies by August 19,
2013. See 76 FR 43184 (July 20, 2011). To correct the deficiencies, on
September 26, 2012, CARB submitted amended SMAQMD Rule 214 for
inclusion in the SIP. On February 14, 2013, a notice of proposed
rulemaking to approve revised Rule 214 was published in the Federal
Register. See 78 FR 10589. On April 25, 2013, Regional Administrator
Jared Blumenfeld signed a notice of final rulemaking to approve revised
Rule 214. It is currently awaiting publication in the Federal Register.
If the final rulemaking for revised Rule 214 becomes effective prior to
EPA finalizing the area's redesignation to attainment for
PM10, the 172(c)(5) and 189(a(1)(A) requirements would be
fulfilled prior to redesignation.
If EPA does not approve revised Rule 214 prior to EPA finalizing
the area's redesignation to attainment for PM10, it would
not affect EPA approval of the redesignation request because upon
redesignation the requirements of SMAQMD's PSD program would apply to
PM10 and PM10 precursor emissions of new major
sources or major modifications. Thus, new major sources with
significant PM10 emissions and major modifications of
PM10 at major sources as defined under 40 CFR 51.21 will be
required to obtain a PSD permit or include PM10 emissions in
their existing PSD permit. Since PSD requirements \14\ will apply after
redesignation, an area being redesignated to attainment need not comply
with the requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be approved prior
to redesignation as long as the state demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS in the area without implementation of nonattainment NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October
14, 1994, titled ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' See also, redesignation
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and, Grand
Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ PSD requirements control the growth of new source emissions
in areas designated as attainment for a NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan, we conclude that the maintenance demonstration does not rely on
implementation of nonattainment NSR because the Plan applies standard
growth factors to stationary source emissions and does not rely on NSR
offsets to reduce the rate of increase in emissions over time from
point sources.\15\ In addition, the PM10 Maintenance Plan
adds emission reduction credits (ERCs) for PM10,
NOX, and SOx to future projected emissions to
ensure that the use of ERCs will not be inconsistent with the future
PM10 maintenance goals. Therefore, EPA concludes that a
fully-approved nonattainment NSR program is not necessary for approval
of the State's redesignation request for the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See letter, Larry Greene, Executive Officer, SMAQMD, to
Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June
28, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We conclude that Sacramento's portion of the California SIP
adequately meets the requirements of section 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A)
for purposes of this redesignation.
Control Requirements for PM10 Precursors
Section 189(e) of the CAA requires that the control requirements
applicable under the part D SIP for major stationary sources of
PM10 also apply to major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors, except where the Administrator determines
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM10
levels which exceed the standard in the area. Sacramento's
PM10 Maintenance Plan states that NOX is a
PM10 precursor in the secondary formation of atmospheric
ammonium nitrates, which are a significant component of PM10
concentrations in the Sacramento area. SMAQMD also determined, based on
analyses of inventories \16\ from CARB and Chemical Mass Balance
modeling, that emissions of sulfur oxides \17\ (SOX) and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from sources in the Sacramento
nonattainment area are an insignificant contributor to secondary
particulate formation in the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area. Therefore, SOX and VOC emissions are not included in
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. See pages 4-1 and 5-4
in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. To satisfy ozone
nonattainment requirements in CAA section 182(b), SMAQMD has adopted
Reasonably Available Control Technology rules to reduce NOX
emissions from existing sources. See Rules 411, 412, and 413 in Table 3
in this action. These rules also address the control requirements in
CAA section 189(e) because they control NOX emissions from
major stationary sources. Major stationary sources of NOX
are also controlled by Rules 202 and 203, which are the District's
nonattainment NSR and PSD permitting programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ California Emission Forecasting System (CEFS) Version 1.06
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD, Rf980.
\17\ The following SMAQMD measures were previously implemented
to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions: Rule 406--Specific Contaminants
and Rule 420--Sulfur Content of Fuels. These measures were approved
into the SIP on December 5, 1984 (49 FR 47490). Adjusting for the
past decrease in SOX emissions, current ambient ammonium
sulfate concentrations are estimated to be about 1 [mu]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance with Section 110(a)(2)
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we conclude the
California SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable
for purposes of this redesignation.
[[Page 44502]]
General and Transportation Conformity Requirements
Under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
states are required to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that
federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP. Section 176(c) further provides
that state conformity provisions must be consistent with federal
conformity regulations that the CAA requires EPA to promulgate. EPA's
conformity regulations are codified at 40 CFR part 93, subparts A
(referred to herein as ``transportation conformity'') and B (referred
to herein as ``general conformity''). Transportation conformity applies
to transportation plans, programs, and projects developed, funded, and
approved under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act, and general
conformity applies to all other federally-supported or funded projects.
SIP revisions intended to address the conformity requirements are
referred to herein as ``conformity SIPs.''
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of a redesignation request
under section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and federal conformity rules apply where state
rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir.
2001), upholding this interpretation. See also, 60 FR 62748 (December
7, 1995).
Thus, EPA proposes to determine that, if EPA later finalizes its
approval of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan described
in today's proposal and also finalizes its approval of the emissions
inventory and motor vehicle emissions budgets for SMAQMD, the State has
a fully-approved SIP meeting all requirements applicable under section
110 and part D for the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area
for purposes of redesignation. CAA Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
C. EPA Has Determined That the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine that the
improvement in air quality is due to emission reductions that are
permanent and enforceable resulting from the implementation of the
applicable SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations
and other permanent and enforceable regulations in order to approve a
redesignation to attainment. Under this criterion, the State must be
able to reasonably attribute the improvement in air quality to
emissions reductions which are permanent and enforceable. Attainment
resulting from temporary reductions in emissions rates (e.g., reduced
production or shutdown due to temporary adverse economic conditions) or
unusually favorable meteorology would not qualify as an air quality
improvement due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
Calcagni memorandum, p. 4.
Historically, exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in
the Sacramento nonattainment area occur in late November and December.
The Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model was used to identify source
contributions for ambient air quality samples collected during the
winter months (i.e., November through January) for 1991-1996. CMB uses
known chemical ``fingerprints'' of various source types together with
measurements of the chemical components of ambient PM10 to
find the contribution of those sources to PM10
concentrations. CMB results show the main components of wintertime
PM10 in the Sacramento nonattainment area were secondary
ammonium nitrate particles (29%), motor vehicle exhaust from cars,
trucks, and buses (23%), wood smoke (17%), and fugitive dust (12%).\18\
The CMB analysis indicates how reductions in emissions of primary
PM10 and PM10 precursors (e.g., NOX)
will reduce ambient PM10 concentrations; each of the ambient
components can be ``rolled back'' in proportion to the emission changes
in the corresponding source categories. The Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan credits control measures adopted and implemented by
SMAQMD and CARB and approved into the SIP by EPA as reducing emissions
to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, section
3.5, page 3-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SMAQMD has jurisdiction over air quality planning requirements
for Sacramento County. The SMAQMD has adopted numerous plans, rules,
and revisions for Sacramento County in order to reduce PM10
and PM10 precursor emissions. The Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan includes a list of control measures adopted and
implemented by SMAQMD and approved into the SIP by EPA as reducing
emissions to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Table 3 lists
SMAQMD rules contributing towards attainment and/or continued
attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Table 3--Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Control Measures and Programs Contributing Towards Attainment and/or
Continued Attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Rule Title approved Citation
into SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
401................................... Ringelmann Chart/Opacity...... 02/01/1984 49 FR 3987.
403................................... Fugitive Dust................. 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
404................................... Particulate Matter............ 07/13/1987 52 FR 26148.
405................................... Dust and Condensed Fumes...... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
406................................... Specific Contaminants......... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
407................................... Open Burn..................... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
417................................... Wood Burning Appliances....... 04/11/2013 78 FR 21540.
408................................... Incinerator Burning........... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
[[Page 44503]]
409................................... Orchard Heaters............... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
411................................... NOX from Boilers, Process 08/01/2007 72 FR 41894.
Heaters, and Steam Generators.
412................................... Stationary Source Internal 04/30/1996 61 FR 18959.
Combustion Engines at Major
Stationary Sources of NOX.
413................................... Stationary Gas Turbines....... 02/11/1999 64 FR 6803.
414................................... Natural Gas Fired Water 04/20/1999, 64 FR 19277
Heaters. 11/01/2011 76 FR 67366.
420................................... Sulfur Content of Fuels....... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
501................................... Agricultural Burning.......... 12/05/1984 49 FR 47490.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other SMAQMD measures or programs not in the SIP 19 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
421................................... Mandatory Episodic Curtailment Wood Stove/ Spare The Air.
of Wood and Other Solid Fuel Fireplace
Burning.. Change Out
Incentive
Program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ On September 26, 2012, Rule 421 was submitted to EPA for inclusion in the SIP. The Wood Stove/Fireplace
Change Out Incentive Program, Spare The Air public education program, and Sacramento Valley Air Basin Smoke
Management Program have not been submitted for inclusion in the SIP.
\20\ Sacramento County also participates in the State's Sacramento Valley Air Basin Smoke Management Program.
The program describes the policies and procedures used with hourly and daily measurements of air quality and
meteorology to determine how much open biomass burning can be allowed in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. The
program ensures that agricultural burning is prohibited on days meteorologically conducive to potentially
elevated PM10 concentrations. The area covered by the program is referred to as the Sacramento Valley Air
Basin, and includes all or parts of the following counties: Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Placer (portion),
Sacramento, Shasta, Solano (portion), Sutter, Tehama, Yolo and Yuba. See Title 17 California Code of
Regulations, Subchapter 2, Section 80100 et. seq. The regulations can be viewed at https://www.arb.ca.gov/smp/regs/RevFinRegwTOC.pdf.
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. 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 measures have helped reduce primary
PM10 and PM10 precursors in the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area and throughout the State.
CARB's 2007 State Strategy and 2009 and 2011 updates to the State
Strategy provide a recent summary of the measures adopted and
implemented by the State.\21\ From 1994 to 2006, the State promulgated
more than thirty-five rules that have achieved significant emission
reductions contributing to attainment and continued attainment in the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area. See 2007 State Strategy,
p.38.22 23 These measures include new emission standards and
in-use requirements that have resulted in significant reductions in
emissions of PM10 and PM10 precursors (e.g.,
NOX) from categories such as passenger cars, trucks, buses,
motorcycles, locomotives, cargo handling equipment, and large off-road
equipment. EPA has generally approved into the SIP all of the State's
measures that are not subject to the CAA section 209 waiver process.
See EPA's final approval of the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5
Plan at 76 FR 69896 (November 9, 2011) and accompanying Technical
Support Document and Responses to Comments.\24\ Finally, in addition to
the local district and State rules discussed above, the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area has also benefitted from emission
reductions from federal measures. These federal measures include EPA`s
national emissions standards for heavy-duty diesel trucks (66 FR 5001
(January 18, 2001)), certain emissions standards for new construction
and farm equipment (Tier 2 and 3 non-road engines standards, 63 FR
56968 (October 23, 1998) and Tier 4 diesel non-road engine standards,
69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004)), and locomotive engine standards (63 FR
18978 (April
[[Page 44504]]
16, 1998) and 73 FR 37096 (June 30, 2008)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See ``Air Resources Board's Proposed State Strategy for
California's 2007 State Implementation Plan,'' release date: April
26, 2007 (2007 State Strategy).
\22\ The 2007 Proposed State Strategy can be found at: https://arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/apr07draft/sipback.pdf. Page 38 of
the Proposed State Strategy lists forty-five actions; thirty-five of
these actions provide NOX reductions.
\23\ 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 and adopted April
24, 2009 (``2009 State Strategy Status Report''). This submittal
updated the 2007 State Strategy to reflect its implementation during
2007 and 2008. 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.
\24\ Technical Support Document and Responses to Comments, Final
Rule on the San Joaquin Valley 2008 PM2.5 State
Implementation Plan, September 30, 2011. This document can be found
at: https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-R09-OAR-2010-
0516-0175.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The on-road and off-road vehicle and engine standards cited above
have contributed to improved air quality through the gradual, continued
turnover and replacement of older vehicle models with newer models
manufactured to meet increasingly stringent emissions standards.
We note that many of the control measures cited above and in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan have provided emissions
reductions since 1990, and thus, the improvement in air quality since
1990 may reasonably be attributed to them.
A sense of the effectiveness of the control measures to reduce
PM10 and PM10 precursor emissions can be gained
by comparing emissions in 1990 (a nonattainment year), 2000 (the year
EPA determined the area met its attainment date) and 2008 (an
attainment year).\25\ In 1990, area-wide PM10 and
NOX emissions in the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area were estimated to be approximately 37 and 133 tons
per day (winter day), respectively. In 2000, despite an increase in
population and vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) of approximately 14% and
15%, respectively, area-wide emissions of PM10 dropped to 33
tons per day and NOX declined to 100 tons per day compared.
Despite increases between 1990 and 2008 in population (29%) and VMT
(35%), area-wide emissions of direct PM10 decreased slightly
to 35 tons per day. NOX emissions decreased significantly to
82 tons per day, a reduction of approximately 38% compared
to 1990 levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the connection between the emissions reductions and
the improvement in air quality, we also conclude that the air quality
improvement in the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area since
1990 through 2011 is not the result of a local economic downturn or
unusual or extreme weather patterns. Our conclusion is based on the air
quality data in Table 1 and recognition that the fluctuation in
economic and meteorological conditions since 1998 did not result in a
violation of the 24-hour PM10 standard.\26\ We do recognize
that a significant economic slowdown occurred nationally starting in
2008, but we note that the downward PM10 trend had already
been established before that time (see Figure 3.3 on page 3-7 of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ EPA's February 2002 determination that the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area had attained the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS was based on complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air monitoring data for 1998-2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, we find that the improvement in air quality in the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area is the result of permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions from a combination of EPA-approved
local and State control measures and federal control measures. As such,
we propose to find that the criterion for redesignation set forth at
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) is satisfied.
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under Clean Air
Act Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
We interpret this section of the Act to require, in general, the
following core elements: attainment inventory, maintenance
demonstration plus a commitment to submit a second maintenance plan
eight years after redesignation, monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and contingency plan. See Calcagni memorandum,
pages 8 through 13.
Under CAA section 175A, a maintenance plan must demonstrate
continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years
after EPA approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan that
demonstrates continued attainment for the subsequent ten-year period
following the initial ten-year maintenance period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency provisions that EPA deems necessary to
promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation of the area. Based on our review and evaluation of the
plan, as detailed below, we are proposing to approve the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan because we believe that it meets the
requirements of CAA section 175A.
1. Attainment Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires plan submittals to include a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources in the nonattainment area. In demonstrating maintenance in
accordance with CAA section 175A and the Calcagni memorandum, the State
should provide an attainment emissions inventory to identify the level
of emissions in the area sufficient to attain the NAAQS. Where the
State has made an adequate demonstration that air quality has improved
as a result of the SIP, the attainment inventory will generally be an
inventory of actual emissions at the time the area attained the
standard. EPA's primary guidance in evaluating these inventories is the
document entitled, ``PM-10 Emissions Inventory Requirements,'' EPA,
OAQPS, EPA-454/R-94-033 (September 1994) which can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eidocs/pm10eir.pdf.
A maintenance plan for the 24-hour PM10 standard must
include an inventory of emissions of PM10 and its precursors
(NOX, sulfur oxides, and volatile organic compounds) in the
area to identify a level of emissions sufficient to attain the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. This inventory must be consistent with EPA's
most recent guidance on emissions inventories for nonattainment areas
available at the time and should represent emissions during the time
period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment. The
inventory must also be comprehensive, including emissions from
stationary point sources, area sources, and mobile sources.
SMAQMD selected year 2008 as the year for the attainment inventory
in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. Year 2008 is a
current, accurate, and comprehensive inventory during a period which
the area continued to attain the 24-hour PM10 standard prior
to adoption and submittal of the redesignation request and maintenance
plan. The attainment inventory will generally be the actual inventory
during the time period the area attained the standard. EPA previously
made an attainment determination for the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area. See 67 FR 7082, February 15, 2002. Thus, Sacramento
Metropolitan's selection of 2008 for the attainment inventory is
acceptable.
Based on our review of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan, we find that the emissions inventories in the Plan are
comprehensive in that they include estimates of PM10 and its
precursors from all of the relevant source categories, which the Plan
divides among stationary, area wide, on-road motor vehicles, and other
mobile.
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan includes
inventories for total primary PM10 and for NOX as
a PM10 precursor. See tables 4-1 and 4-2 in the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan. Appendix A to the PM10
Maintenance Plan contains additional details of the emission
inventories for 2008 (and 1990, 1995, 2000, 2012, and 2022). As
previously described in section V.B.2, SMAQMD determined, based on
analyses of inventories from CARB and Chemical Mass Balance modeling,
that
[[Page 44505]]
emissions of SOx and VOCs from sources in the Sacramento
nonattainment area are an insignificant contributor to secondary
particulate formation in the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment
area. Therefore, SOx and VOC emissions are not included in
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
The stationary source category includes non-mobile, fixed sources
of air pollution. Examples of sources included in this category include
fuel combustion (e.g., electric utilities), waste disposal (e.g.,
landfills), and oil and gas production. SMAQMD's 2008 (and subsequent
year inventories) for stationary sources were developed using methods
in CARB's 2009 Almanac \27\ and information reported by emission
sources to SMAQMD and entered into the California Emission Inventory
Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS) database.\28\ For area wide
sources, SMAQMD calculated emissions based on reported data for fuel
usage, product sales, population, employment data, and other parameters
covering a wide range of activities.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ The 2009 Almanac contains information about current and
historical air quality and emissions in California. In addition,
forecasted emissions are presented. See https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac09/almanac09.htm
\28\ The CEIDARS database consists of two categories of
information: source information and utility information. Source
information includes the basic inventory information generated and
collected on all point and area sources. Utility information
generally includes auxiliary data, which helps categorize and
further define the source information. Used together, CEIDARS is
capable of generating complex reports based on a multitude of
category and source selection criteria.
\29\ For more information on emissions from the area-wide source
category, see the CARB Web site: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The on-road mobile source category consists of trucks, automobiles,
buses, and motorcycles. The on-road emissions inventory estimates in
the Sacramento PM10 Plan were prepared by CARB using
EMFAC2007 (version 2.3), a California model for on-road motor vehicle
emissions.\30\ The vehicle miles traveled were developed from
Sacramento Area Council of Governments-supplied activity data using
transportation modeling prepared for the Sacramento region's August
2009 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ EMFAC software and detailed information on the vehicle
emission model can be found on the CARB Web site at https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/on-road.htm.
\31\ Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program 2009/12,
Sacramento Area Council of Governments, August 21, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to nonroad mobile sources (or other mobile as
categorized in the PM10 Plan), the category includes
aircraft, trains, boats, and off-road vehicles and equipment used for
construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational
activities. CARB used its OFFROAD2007 to calculate the nonroad
emissions.\32\ In general, emissions are calculated using equipment
population, engine size and load, usage activity, and emission factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/offroad.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4 presents the direct PM10 and PM10
precursor emissions (i.e., NOX) estimates contained in the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan for 2008. Based on the
estimates in table 4, the area-wide category of emissions accounted for
86% of the direct PM10, with residential fuel combustion
making up 28%, construction and demolition 20%, and paved road dust 17%
of the total direct PM10 inventory for 2008. Mobile source
emissions accounted for 90% of the NOX emissions generated
within the PM10 nonattainment area in 2008 with on-road
motor vehicle emissions comprising approximately 61% and off-road
equipment 20% of the total NOX inventory for 2008.
Table 4--2008 Actual PM10 Emissions From Various Source Categories in the Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area,
Total Daily Emissions
[Tons per day, average winter day]\a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008
Category Emission source -----------------------------
PM10 NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary..................................... Fuel Combustion.................. 0.5 3.9
Industrial Processes............. 1.0 0.1
Area wide...................................... Residential Fuel Combustion...... 9.9 4.4
Farming Operations............... 2.4 .............
Construction and Demolition...... 7.0 .............
Paved Road Dust.................. 6.1 .............
Unpaved Road Dust................ 3.6 .............
Managed Burning and Disposal..... ............. 0.1
Other............................ 1.2 .............
On-Road Motor Vehicles......................... On-Road Motor Vehicles........... 2.2 49.6
Other Mobile................................... Aircraft......................... 0.1 2.0
Trains........................... 0.1 3.4
Boats............................ 0.1 0.5
Equipment (Off-Road/Farm)........ 1.1 17.8
������������������������������������������������
Totals ................................. 35 82
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ From Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Based on our review of the emissions inventories (and related
documentation) from the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, we
find that the inventories for 2008 are comprehensive, that the methods
and assumptions used by CARB and SMAQMD to develop the emission
inventories are reasonable, and that the 2008 inventory reasonably
estimates actual PM10 emissions in the attainment year.
Therefore, we are proposing to approve the 2008 inventory, which serves
as the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan's attainment year
inventory, as satisfying the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA for the purposes of redesignation of the Sacramento PM10
nonattainment area to attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
Section 175A(a) of the CAA requires that the maintenance plan
``provide for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air
quality standard for such air pollutant in the area concerned for at
[[Page 44506]]
least 10 years after the redesignation.'' Generally, a state may
demonstrate maintenance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS by
modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emissions rates
will not cause a violation of the NAAQS. A showing that future
emissions will not exceed the level of the attainment year inventory
can also be used to further support of a maintenance demonstration. For
areas that are required under the Act to submit modeled attainment
demonstrations, the maintenance demonstration should use the same type
of modeling. Calcagni memorandum, page 9.
In addition to accounting for area-wide growth trends, SMAQMD
included growth in airport emissions to accommodate future airport
expansions within the Sacramento County Airport System.\33\ The portion
of the 2012 and 2022 inventories associated with airports is detailed
in table 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, section
4.7, page 4-10.
Table 5--Airport Emissions for Sacramento County Only, Total Daily Emissions
[Tons per day, average winter day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX PM10
Emission source ---------------------------------------------------------------
2012 2022 2012 2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Operations Only........................ 2.3 3.0 0.1 0.1
Ground Support Equipment........................ 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ From table 4-4 in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
SMAQMD also included emissions reduction credits (ERCs) from pre-
2008 ERCs, future bankable rice burning ERCs, and the wood stove/
fireplace change out incentive program in the event that the ERCs are
used for the purposes of issuing permits for new or modified stationary
sources in the air quality planning area.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, section
4.7, page 4-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed the methods and assumptions, as described in
connection with the attainment inventory, that SMAQMD used to project
emissions to 2012 and 2022 for the various source categories and find
them to be reasonable. The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan's maintenance demonstration is based on the use of Chemical Mass
Balance (CMB) with proportional rollback (69 FR 5412, 5424-5425 and 69
FR 30006) to demonstrate maintenance of the 24-hour PM10
standard until 2022. See Plan, pp. 6-1--6-5. Under proportional
rollback, changes in source categories' emissions are added in
proportion to their corresponding component from CMB. In proportional
rollback, a 1% change in direct PM10 emissions causes a 1%
change in the direct PM10 ambient component. However,
because ammonium nitrate is secondary PM, that is, it is formed from
chemical reactions in the air, it does not necessarily scale one-to-one
with the precursor NOX emissions. The Plan relied on
photochemical modeling results showing that a 1% change in
NOX emission causes only a 0.7% change in ammonium nitrate.
See Plan, p. 6-3.
The results of the modeling show that all monitoring sites in the
Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area will be below the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS in 2022, with the projected value of 99 [mu]g/m3
at the T Street site, which had the peak monitored value from 2006-2008
in the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area. See Plan, Table
6.3.
In addition to the CMB rollback modeling in the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan, it also demonstrates that the 2022
maintenance year inventory is well below the 2008 attainment year
inventory for PM10 precursors (i.e., NOX) and
flat for direct PM10. Thus, even without the rollback
analysis previously described, the Plan clearly demonstrates
maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS through 2022. Tables 6, 7 and
8 compare inventory estimates for direct PM10 and
PM10 precursor (i.e., NOX) for various years,
including the 2008 attainment year, 2012, and the 2022 maintenance
year. Since current ambient concentrations are well below the NAAQS,
the slight increase in projected direct PM10 emissions is
consistent with maintenance of the NAAQS. Even if all ambient
PM10 were directly emitted (i.e., without accounting for the
benefit of NOx reductions), the 2008 measured ambient level of 109
[mu]g/m\3\ could increase by 37% and remain below the NAAQS, so direct
PM10 emissions could also increase by 37% and the area would
remain in attainment. In fact, direct PM10 is projected to
increase by only 3% (or 7% considering potential increases in road dust
allowed for in the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget). This is a very
conservative conclusion, because is assumes NOx emissions are constant,
whereas they are actually projected to decrease by 50%, with an
accompanying reduction in the ammonium nitrate component of
PM10. The effects of the declining NOx and slightly
increasing PM constitute a variant of simple rollback modeling, and can
be considered a second, supporting maintenance demonstration method in
addition to the CMB proportional rollback demonstration.
Table 6--Summary of 2008 Actual and 2012 and 2022 Projected PM10 and NOX
Emissions in the Sacramento PM10 Nonattainment Area
[Tons per day, average winter day]\a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutants 2008 2012 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM10............................................... 35 35 36
NOX................................................ 82 67 42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ From Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan; includes
Emission Reduction Credits in 2012 and 2022 for PM10 and NOX in table
4-5 of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Based on our review of the 2012 and 2022 emissions inventories and
related documentation from the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan, we find that the 2012 and 2022 emissions inventories in the
PM10 Maintenance Plan reflect the latest planning
assumptions and emissions models available at the time the Plan was
developed, and provide a comprehensive and reasonably accurate basis
upon which to forecast direct PM10 and PM10
precursor emissions for years 2012 and 2022.\35\ These inventories
further support maintenance through 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ The 2022 emission inventory includes emissions reductions
from State measures adopted through 2006. Because the measures in
Table 3 were adopted after 2006, the 2022 inventory is a
conservative estimate of the projected emissions. December 27, 2012
email from Martin Johnson of CARB to John Ungvarsky, EPA.
[[Page 44507]]
Table 7--2008 Actual and 2012 and 2022 Projected PM10 Emissions From Various Source Categories in the Sacramento
PM10 Nonattainment Area, Total Daily Emissions
[Tons per day, average winter day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM10
Category Emission source --------------------------------------------
2008 2012 2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary............................. Fuel Combustion........... 0.5 0.5 0.6
Industrial Processes...... 1.0 0.9 1.1
Area wide.............................. Residential Fuel 9.9 9.2 10.2
Combustion.
Farming Operations........ 2.4 2.3 2.1
Construction and 7.0 7.2 7.8
Demolition.
Paved Road Dust........... 6.1 6.2 6.4
Unpaved Road Dust......... 3.6 3.6 3.6
Other..................... 1.2 1.3 1.4
On-Road Motor Vehicles................. On-Road Motor Vehicles.... 2.2 2.1 2.1
Other Mobile........................... Aircraft.................. 0.1 0.1 0.1
Trains.................... 0.1 0.1 0.1
Boats..................... 0.1 0.1 0.1
Equipment (Off-Road/Farm). 1.1 1.0 0.4
Totals............................. .......................... 35 35 36
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ From Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Table 8--2008 and Projected 2012 and 2022 NOX Emissions From Various Source Categories in the Sacramento PM10
Nonattainment Area, Total Daily Emissions
[Tons per day, average winter day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX
Category Emission source --------------------------------------------
2008 2012 2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary............................. Fuel Combustion........... 3.9 4.0 4.2
Industrial Processes...... 0.1 0.1 0.1
Areawide............................... Residential Fuel 4.4 4.3 4.4
Combustion.
Managed Burning and 0.1 0.1 0.1
Disposal.
On-Road Motor Vehicles................. On-Road Motor Vehicles.... 49.6 37.6 18.1
Other Mobile........................... Aircraft.................. 2.0 2.3 3.0
Trains.................... 3.4 3.3 3.6
Boats..................... 0.5 0.5 0.5
Off-Road Equipment........ 16.0 13.6 7.6
Farm Equipment............ 1.8 1.4 0.6
Totals............................. .......................... 82 67 42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ From Appendix A in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Taking the CMB results into account gives an even stronger
conclusion with respect to the acceptability of the slight increase of
direct PM10 emissions. According to the CMB proportional
rollback, direct PM10 contributes 81 [mu]g/m\3\ of the 2008
total. See Plan, Table 6.3, p. 6-5. Considering the measured 109 [mu]g/
m\3\, that component could increase by 41 [mu]g/m\3\, or 50%, and the
sum would remain below the NAAQS. When combined, the projected slight
PM10 emissions increase and substantial NOX
emissions decrease are well below the levels consistent with attainment
through the 2022 maintenance period and thereby adequately demonstrate
maintenance through that period.
a. Showing That Maintenance Plan Provides for Ten Years of Maintenance
Through 2023
Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten
years following redesignation.'' September 4, 1992 Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, AQMD, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' p. 9.
As discussed in detail above, the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan expressly documents that the area's emissions
inventories will remain below the attainment year inventories through
2022. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA believes that
the State's submission, in conjunction with additional supporting
information, further demonstrates that the area will continue to
maintain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS at least through 2023. Thus,
if EPA finalizes its proposed approval of the redesignation request and
maintenance plans in 2013, it will be based in part on a showing, in
accordance with section 175A, that the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan provides for maintenance for at least ten years after
redesignation. EPA believes the area will continue to maintain the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS at least through 2023 for the following
reasons.
1. Significant emissions controls remain in place and will continue
to provide reductions that keep the area in attainment. Because the
Sacramento area is currently nonattainment for the 1997 and 2008 ozone
standards and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, it is
expected that not only will existing emissions controls remain in
place, but the Sacramento area may need additional reductions (e.g.,
NOX) to attain the aforementioned standards. In addition,
the emissions controls that brought the area into attainment cannot be
removed from the SIP unless the
[[Page 44508]]
State demonstrates that the removal would be consistent with sections
110(l) and 193 of the CAA.
2. The 2022 projected emissions inventory for PM10
precursors is well below the 2008 attainment year level and is expected
to decline or remain stable during the 2022 to 2023 period. It is
extremely improbable that emissions would increase between 2022 and
2023 such that they would exceed the 2008 attainment year levels. As
shown in table 7, while primary PM10 emissions have remained
relatively flat, by 2022 NOX emissions are projected to
decline by approximately 70% and 49% when compared to 1990 and 2008,
respectively. The majority of these reductions resulted from cleaner
fuels, tighter emission standards, and fleet turnover in the mobile
source sector. The 2022 emission inventory is conservative in that it
does not include reductions from State measures adopted after 2006.
Because Sacramento is nonattainment for the 1997 and 2008 ozone
standards and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, SMAQMD and
the State may need to adopt additional measures that will further
reduce emissions between 2013 and 2023. Because fundamental relaxations
or changes to the existing SIP-approved measures, mobile source fleet,
and infrastructure cannot be easily made or reversed during the 2022-
2023 period, it is highly unlikely that PM10 and
PM10 precursor emissions would increase significantly
between 2022 and 2023 to the extent it would jeopardize a showing of
maintenance for a 10-year period after redesignation.
3. Fleet turnover supports a continued gradual decrease in emission
levels beyond 2025. Specifically, California's Low Emission Vehicle
(LEV) program sets gasoline and vehicle emissions standards for
passenger cars, light trucks, and larger passenger vehicles. The
program was designed to reduce emissions, including NOX,
responsible for the ozone and particulate matter impacts from these
vehicles. The LEV 2 standards were phased in between 2004 and 2010,
have been replaced by the LEV 3 standards adopted in 2012. The LEV 3
standards represent a further strengthening of the program and are
planned to be phased in between 2015 and 2025. Consequently, the full
emission reduction benefits from the LEV 2 and 3 standards will not be
achieved until after 2022 and continue beyond 2023.\36\ The
relationship between the LEV standards and fleet turnover is just one
example of a measure providing continued NOX emissions
reductions between 2022 and 2023 because of continued fleet turnover.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ 2011 records from CARB's inspection and maintenance program
indicate approximately 20% of the fleet had not yet turned over
after 15 years. It is reasonable to assume that because the LEV 2
standards were not fully implemented until 2009, the reductions from
the program will continue through 2023, which would represent the 14
years of turnover affected by the LEV 2 standards. Thus, it is
reasonable to conclude reductions from fleet turnover would continue
even beyond 2023. To see the report, go to: https://www.bar.ca.gov/80_BARResources/04_Miscellaneous/USEPA%202010%20Calendar%20Year.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Air quality concentrations are well below the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS, and, when coupled with the emissions inventory
projections through 2022, clearly show it would be very unlikely for a
PM10 violation to occur in 2023. The Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area has not violated the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS since 1990. Air quality concentrations for the
three most recent years (2009-2011) of complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air monitoring data show the highest monitored
PM10 concentration to be 76 [micro]g/m\3\, approximately
half of the PM10 NAAQS. The historical trend of the maximum
24-hour PM10 peak concentrations between 1989 and 2011
indicates a steady decline.\37\ As shown in table 7, by 2022
PM10 precursor emissions (NOX) will drop
significantly compared to 2008, and direct PM10 emissions
will remain relatively flat. The combination of the air quality
concentrations well below the standard and the declining inventory as
described above indicate it is highly unlikely that the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area will violate the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS during the 2022 to 2023 period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan, Figure
3.3, page 3-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the above reasons, EPA believes the area will continue to
maintain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS at least through 2023 and
that the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan shows maintenance
for a period of ten years following redesignation. Thus, if EPA
finalizes its proposed approval of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan in 2013, it is based on a showing, in accordance with
section 175A, that the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
provides for maintenance for at least ten years after redesignation.
3. Verification of Continued Attainment
In demonstrating maintenance, continued attainment of the NAAQS can
be verified through operation of an appropriate air quality monitoring
network. The Calcagni memorandum states that the maintenance plan
should contain provisions for continued operation of air quality
monitors that will provide such verification. Calcagni memorandum, p.
11. As discussed in section V.A. of this document, PM10 is
currently monitored by SMAQMD (five sites) and CARB (one site) within
the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area. In the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan (see Plan, p. 7-1), SMAQMD indicates
its intention to continue operation of an air quality monitoring
network that meets or exceeds the minimum monitoring requirements and
that ambient PM10 concentrations will be monitored
appropriately to verify continued attainment of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan
also notes that a review of the entire monitoring network will be
undertaken annually as required by federal regulations.\38\ We find the
SMAQMD's commitment for continued ambient PM10 monitoring as
set forth in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan to be
acceptable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ EPA's requirements for annual review of monitoring networks
are found at 40 CFR 58.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the transportation conformity process, which would require
a comparison of on-road motor vehicle emissions that would occur under
new or amended regional transportation plans and programs with the
MVEBs in the PM10 Maintenance Plan, represents another means
by which to verify continued attainment of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS in Sacramento County. See page 8-1 of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan.
Lastly, while not cited in the Plan, CARB and SMAQMD must inventory
emissions sources and report to EPA on a periodic basis under 40 CFR
part 51, subpart A (``Air Emissions Reporting Requirements''). These
emissions inventory updates will provide a third way to evaluate
emissions trends in the area and thereby verify continued attainment of
the NAAQS. These methods are sufficient for the purpose of verifying
continued attainment.
4. Contingency Provisions
Section 175A(d) of the Clean Air Act requires that maintenance
plans include contingency provisions, as EPA deems necessary, to
promptly correct any violations of the NAAQS that occur after
redesignation of the area. Such provisions must include a requirement
that the State will implement all measures with respect to the control
of the air pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP for the
area before redesignation of the area as an attainment area. These
contingency provisions are distinguished from those
[[Page 44509]]
generally required for nonattainment areas under section 172(c)(9) in
that they are not required to be fully-adopted measures that will take
effect without further action by the state in order for the maintenance
plan to be approved. However, the contingency plan is considered to be
an enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the contingency
measures are adopted expeditiously once they are triggered by a
specified event.
Under section 175A(d), contingency measures identified in the
contingency plan do not have to be fully adopted at the time of
redesignation. However, the contingency plan is considered to be an
enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the contingency
measures are adopted expeditiously once they are triggered by a
specified event. The maintenance plan should clearly identify the
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a specific timeline for action by the State. As a
necessary part of the plan, the State should also identify specific
indicators or triggers, which will be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be implemented.
As required by section 175A of the CAA, SMAQMD has adopted a
contingency plan to address possible future PM10 air quality
problems. The contingency provisions in the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan are contained in section 7.3 of the Plan and were
clarified in a subsequent letter from the District.\39\ After
verification of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS violation, including
allowing sufficient time for sample weighing and processing, SMAQMD
commits to the following steps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See letter, Larry Greene, Executive Officer, SMAQMD, to
Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June
28, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Examine the violation to determine if it qualifies as a natural
or exceptional event.
(2) If the violation was not a natural or exceptional event, SMAQMD
will analyze the event to determine its plausible causes. Any
applicable emission reductions from already adopted rules that have not
yet been implemented would be evaluated to determine if these new
emission reductions would be sufficient to prevent future
PM10 exceedances. These already adopted controls could
include CARB and SMAQMD PM2.5 and NOX measures to
address ozone and PM2.5 SIP requirements. In addition, the
SMAQMD would evaluate applicable reasonably available control measures
(RACM) that could potentially provide the corrective action needed.
This evaluation step will take no more than 18 months.
(3) If the additional emission reductions from already adopted
rules are insufficient, the SMAQMD would proceed with selecting
specific RACM measures for adoption and implementation that would be
applicable to addressing the seasonal PM10 problem. Appendix
B in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan contains potential
RACM measures to be evaluated for future adoption and implementation.
This adoption and implementation step will take no more than 12 months.
In their June 28, 2013 letter, SMAQMD clarified that all three of
the aforementioned steps will be completed, including the
implementation of additional control measures, within 24 months.
Upon our review of the Plan, as summarized above, we find that the
contingency provisions of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan clearly identify specific contingency measures, contain tracking
and triggering mechanisms to determine when contingency measures are
needed, contain a description of the process of recommending and
implementing contingency measures, and contain specific timelines for
action. Thus, we conclude that the contingency provisions of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan are adequate to ensure
prompt correction of a violation and therefore comply with section
175A(d) of the Act. For the reasons set forth above, EPA is proposing
to find that the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan is
consistent with the maintenance plan contingency provision requirements
of the CAA and EPA guidance.
5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
Section 175A(b) of the CAA provides that eight years after
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan that
demonstrates continued attainment for the subsequent ten-year period
following the initial ten-year maintenance period. The Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan includes a SMAQMD commitment to
prepare and submit a revised maintenance plan in 2020, seven years
after redesignation to attainment. See page 6-7 of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan.
In light of the discussion set forth above, EPA is proposing to
approve the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 175A.
6. Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
a. Requirements for Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans, programs and
projects in the nonattainment or maintenance areas that are funded or
approved under title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Laws (49 U.S.C.
chapter 53) must conform to the applicable SIP. In short, a
transportation plan and program are deemed to conform to the applicable
SIP if the emissions resulting from the implementation of that
transportation plan and program are less than or equal to the motor
vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) established in the SIP for the
attainment year, maintenance year and other years. See, generally, 40
CFR part 93 for the federal conformity regulations and 40 CFR 93.118
specifically for how budgets are used in conformity.
The budgets serve as a ceiling on emissions that would result from
an area's planned transportation system. The budget concept is further
explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation
conformity rule (58 FR 62188). Maintenance plan submittals must specify
the maximum emissions of transportation-related PM10 and
NOX emissions allowed in the last year of the maintenance
period, i.e., the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs). (MVEBs may
also be specified for additional years during the maintenance period.)
The submittal must also demonstrate that these emissions levels, when
considered with emissions from all other sources, are consistent with
maintenance of the NAAQS.
b. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan
The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan contains
PM10 and NOX MVEBs for the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area for 2008, 2012, and 2022. The MVEBs
are the on-road mobile source primary PM10 and
NOX (as a PM10 precursor) emissions for
Sacramento County for 2008, 2012 and 2022. The MVEBs are compatible
with the 2008, 2012, and 2022 on-road mobile source PM10 and
NOX emissions included in SMAQMD's 2008, 2012, and 2022
p.m.10 and NOX emission inventories, as
summarized above in tables 6, 7 and 8. The derivation of the MVEBs is
thoroughly discussed in section 8 of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.\40\
[[Page 44510]]
The motor vehicle emissions budgets for Sacramento are summarized in
table 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Additional information associated with the motor vehicle
emission budget calculations is provided in a technical analysis
accompanying June 2013 letters from ARB and SMAQMD to EPA.
\41\ See Table 8.1, page 8-4 of the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan.
Table 9--Summary of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (Tons per Day,
Average Winter Day) in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan \41\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget year PM10 NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008.................................................... 15 50
2012.................................................... 15 38
2022.................................................... 17 19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The details for each component of the budgets are shown in table 10
and are comprised of direct on-road mobile source emissions, road
construction emissions, fugitive emissions from paved and unpaved
roads, and safety margins. A state may choose to apply a safety margin
under our transportation conformity rule so long as such margins are
explicitly quantified in the applicable plan and are shown to be
consistent with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS (whichever is
relevant to the particular plan).\42\ In this instance, the safety
margin has been explicitly quantified and shown to be consistent with
continued maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS through the
applicable maintenance period, through 2023. The MVEBs incorporate: (1)
On-road motor vehicle emission inventory factors of EMFAC2007 \43\ and
AP-42; \44\ and (2) updated recent vehicle activity data from
Sacramento Area Council of Governments' Sacramento Activity-Based
Travel Demand Simulation Model transportation modeling system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See 40 CFR 93.124(a).
\43\ EMFAC (EMission FACtor) is California's model for
estimating emissions from on-road vehicles operating in California.
EPA approved EMFAC2007 on January 18, 2008 (73 FR 3464). CARB's
latest release is EMFAC 2011 which EPA approved on March 6, 2013 (78
FR 14533) was not approved when this plan was developed.
\44\ AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, is a
document published by EPA as the primary collection of EPA approved
emission factor information. The emission factors have been
developed and compiled from source test data, material balance
studies, and engineering estimates. EPA has publishes supplements
and updates to the each of the chapters available in Volume I,
Stationary Point and Area Sources at the following Web site: https://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/.
\45\ Ibid.
\46\ The Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan includes
PM10 MVEB safety margins of 1.3 tons per day (tpd) for
2012 and 2.4 tpd for 2022. This additional increase may be needed
for the Sacramento Area Council of Governments to make a
transportation conformity determinations, including for a horizon
year of 2035 or later for transportation planning purposes when
using the latest year of motor vehicle emissions budgets (2022) in
the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. See letter, Larry
Greene, Executive Officer, SMAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 28, 2013. Also see letter,
Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, CARB, to Deborah Jordan,
Director, Air Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June 13, 2013.
Table 10--Source Categories and Emissions Comprising the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (Tons per Day, Average
Winter Day) in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan \45\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 2012 2022
Category -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX PM10 NOX PM10 NOX PM10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Exhaust \a\................ 49.6 2.2 37.6 2.1 18.1 2.1
Paved Road Dust................... ........... 6.1 ........... 4.9 ........... 5.5
Unpaved Road Dust................. ........... 3.6 ........... 3.6 ........... 3.6
Road Construction Dust............ ........... 2.7 ........... 2.8 ........... 2.8
Safety Margin \46\................ ........... ........... ........... 1.3 ........... 2.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals (rounded up to nearest ton) 50 15 38 15 19 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Direct Exhaust includes PM10 from tire and brake wear.
c. Initial Adequacy Review of Budgets
On September 1, 2011, EPA announced the availability of the
Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan with MVEBs and a 30-day
public comment period on EPA's Adequacy Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/reg9sips.htm#ca. The comment
period for this notification ended on October 3, 2011, and EPA received
no comments from the public. On November 23, 2011, EPA published in the
Federal Register (76 FR 72404) a finding of adequacy for the
PM10 MVEBs for the years 2008, 2012, and 2022.
d. Updated Technical Review
As described earlier, the budgets were developed using emission
factors generated by CARB's EMFAC2007 model and AP-42. The paved road
emissions were originally calculated using the 2006 version of AP-42 by
estimating the 2008 paved road emissions and projecting them to 2012
and 2022. The calculation relied on a California profile of silt
loading, weather, and growth in roadway centerline miles.
EPA released an update to Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP-42) in January of 2011, which revised the equation for
estimating paved road dust emissions based on an updated regression
that included new emission tests results. CARB staff conducted an
additional technical analysis of the Sacramento County paved road
emission projections using the updated AP-42 equation and growth in
vehicle miles traveled, to ensure that the motor vehicle emission
budgets were still consistent with the currently approved modeling
tools and data and the maintenance demonstration. The technical
analysis showed that the updated paved road emissions provided safety
margins in 2012 and 2022 as compared to the attainment inventory
emissions of paved road dust which was used in establishing the MVEBs
in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.\47\ Therefore, the
total MVEBs are consistent with maintenance of the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See letter, Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, CARB, to
Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, US EPA, Region 9, dated June
13, 2013. See Letter, Larry Greene, Executive Director/Air Pollution
Control Officer, SMAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director Air Division,
US EPA, Region 9, dated June 28, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Proposed Actions on the Budgets
EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for 2008, 2012 and 2022 as
part of our approval of Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan.
EPA has determined that the MVEB emission targets are consistent with
emission control measures in the SIP and that Sacramento County can
maintain attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Because the
budgets EPA found
[[Page 44511]]
adequate in 2011 are the same budgets EPA is proposing to approve in
this action, if EPA approves the MVEBs in the final rulemaking action,
it would not change the budgets currently in use for future
transportation conformity determinations for Sacramento County. As
discussed in section V.D.2.a of this notice, EPA is proposing that if
this approval is finalized in 2013 the area will continue to maintain
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS through at least 2023. Consistent
with this proposal, EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs submitted by
the State in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan. EPA is
proposing that the submitted budgets, when combined with EPA's
additional analysis for the 2022-2023 time period, are consistent with
maintenance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS through 2023.
VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Based on our review of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan submitted by the State, air quality monitoring data, and other
relevant materials, EPA is proposing to find that the State has
addressed all the necessary requirements for redesignation of the
Sacramento nonattainment area to attainment of the PM10
NAAQS, pursuant to CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A.
First, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), we are proposing to approve
CARB's request, which accompanied the submittal of the Sacramento
PM10 Maintenance Plan, to redesignate the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. We are doing so based on our conclusion that the
area has met the five criteria for redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion is based on our proposed determination
that the area has attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS; that
relevant portions of the California SIP are fully approved; that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions; that California has met all requirements
applicable to the Sacramento PM10 nonattainment area with
respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA; and is based on our
proposed approval of the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan as
part of this action.
Second, in connection with the Sacramento PM10
Maintenance Plan and EPA's analysis showing maintenance through 2023,
EPA finds that the maintenance demonstration showing how the area will
continue to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for 10 years
beyond redesignation (i.e., through 2023) and the contingency
provisions describing the actions that SMAQMD will take in the event of
a future monitored violation meet all applicable requirements for
maintenance plans and related contingency provisions in section 175A of
the CAA. EPA is also proposing to approve the motor vehicle emissions
budgets in the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan because we
find they meet the applicable transportation conformity requirements
under 40 CFR 93.118(e). Lastly, EPA is proposing to approve the 2008
inventory, which serves as the Sacramento PM10 Maintenance
Plan's attainment year inventory, as satisfying the requirements of
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.
We are soliciting comments on these proposed actions. We will
accept comments from the public on this proposal for 30 days following
publication of this proposal in the Federal Register. We will consider
these comments before taking final action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by State law. Redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, 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, these actions merely propose to approve a
State plan and redesignation request as meeting federal requirements
and do not impose additional requirements beyond those by State law.
For these reasons, these proposed actions:
Are not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to 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. In addition, there
are no federally recognized tribes located within the Sacramento
PM10 nonattainment area.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 12, 2013.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-17825 Filed 7-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
