Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; San Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5, 1482-1491 [2015-00309]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
1482
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period
on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on part of the
rule and if that part can be severed from
the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the rules section of this Federal
Register.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference,
Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart Q—Iowa
Dated: December 19, 2014.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
2. In § 52.820, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entry for
‘‘CHAPTER V’’ to read as follows:
■
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Environmental Protection
Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part
52 as set forth below:
§ 52.820
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA–APPROVED IOWA REGULATIONS
Iowa citation
State effective
date
Title
EPA approval
date
Explanation
Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567]
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Polk County
CHAPTER V
*
*
Polk County
Board of
Health Rules
and Regulations Air Pollution Chapter V.
*
*
08/05/13
*
[FR Doc. 2015–00080 Filed 1–9–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0813; FRL–9921–22–
Region 9]
Designation of Areas for Air Quality
Planning Purposes; California; San
Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as
Serious Nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to reclassify
the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Moderate
nonattainment area, including areas of
Indian country within it, as a Serious
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) based on EPA’s determination
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
January 12, 2015
[Insert Federal
Register citation].
Article I, Section 5–2, definition of ‘‘variance,’’ ‘‘anaerobic lagoon,’’ and
‘‘greenhouse gases’’; Article III, Incineration and Open Burning, Section 5–7(d) Variance Application; Article VI, Sections 5–16(n), (o)
and (p); Article VIII; Article IX, Sections 5–27(3) and (4); Article X,
Section 5–28, subsections (a) through (c), and Article X, Section 5–
35(b)(5); Article XIII; and Article XVI, Section 5–75 are not part of
the SIP. Article VI, Section 5–17, adopted by Polk County on 7/26/
2011, is not part of the SIP, and the previously approved version of
Article VI, Section 5–17 remains part of the SIP.
that the area cannot practicably attain
these NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of April 5, 2015. Upon
final reclassification as a Serious area,
California will be required to submit a
Serious area plan including a
demonstration that the plan provides for
attainment of the 1997 annual and 24hour PM2.5 standards in the SJV area by
the applicable attainment date, which is
no later than December 31, 2015, or by
the most expeditious alternative date
practicable, in accordance with the
requirements of part D of title I of the
Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must arrive by
February 11, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2014–0813, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
• Email: lee.anita@epa.gov.
• Mail or delivery: Anita Lee; Air
Planning Office (AIR–2); U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 9; 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send
email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comments due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket
(docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2014–
0813) for this proposed rule is available
electronically on the
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
www.regulations.gov Web site and in
hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some
may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anita Lee, Air Planning Office (AIR–2),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 9, (415) 972–3958, lee.anita@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background for Proposed Action
II. Evaluation of Ambient PM2.5 Air Quality
Monitoring Data
III. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment
and Applicable Attainment Dates
IV. Reclassification of Areas of Indian
Country
V. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
VI. Summary of Proposed Action and
Request for Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for Proposed Action
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
On July 18, 1997, EPA established
new national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5,
particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5
microns or less, including an annual
standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3) based on a 3-year average
of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations,
and a 24-hour (daily) standard of 65 mg/
m3 based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 24-hour PM2.5
concentrations.1 EPA established these
standards after considering substantial
evidence from numerous health studies
demonstrating that serious health effects
are associated with exposures to PM2.5
concentrations above the levels of these
standards.
Epidemiological studies have shown
statistically significant correlations
1 See 62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997) and 40 CFR
50.7. Effective December 18, 2006, EPA
strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by
lowering the level to 35 mg/m3. See 71 FR 61144
(October 17, 2006) and 40 CFR 50.13. Effective
March 18, 2013, EPA strengthened the annual PM2.5
NAAQS by lowering the level to 12 mg/m3. See 78
FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) and 40 CFR 50.18. In
this preamble, all references to the PM2.5 NAAQS,
unless otherwise specified, are to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 standard of 65 mg/m3 and annual standard of
15.0 mg/m3 as codified in 40 CFR 50.7.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
between elevated PM2.5 levels and
premature mortality. Other important
health effects associated with PM2.5
exposure include aggravation of
respiratory and cardiovascular disease
(as indicated by increased hospital
admissions, emergency room visits,
absences from school or work, and
restricted activity days), changes in lung
function and increased respiratory
symptoms, as well as new evidence for
more subtle indicators of cardiovascular
health. Individuals particularly
sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung
disease, and children.2
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the
atmosphere as a solid or liquid particle
(primary PM2.5 or direct PM2.5) or can be
formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions from
precursor emissions of nitrogen oxides,
sulfur oxides, volatile organic
compounds, and ammonia (secondary
PM2.5).3
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required by
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d) to
designate areas throughout the nation as
attaining or not attaining the NAAQS.
On January 5, 2005, EPA published
initial air quality designations for the
1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,
using air quality monitoring data for the
three-year periods of 2001–2003 and
2002–2004.4 These designations became
effective on April 5, 2005.5 EPA
designated the San Joaquin Valley (SJV)
area as nonattainment for both the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard (15.0 mg/m3) and
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard (65 mg/
m3).6
The SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area
encompasses over 23,000 square miles
and includes all or part of eight
counties: San Joaquin, Stanislaus,
Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings,
and the valley portion of Kern.7 The
area is home to 4 million people and is
the nation’s leading agricultural region.
Stretching over 250 miles from north to
south and averaging 80 miles wide, it is
partially enclosed by the Coast
Mountain range to the west, the
Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and
the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD
or District) has primary responsibility
2 See EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate
Matter, No. EPA/600/P–99/002aF and EPA/600/P–
99/002bF, October 2004.
3 See 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
4 See 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
5 Id.
6 See 40 CFR 81.305.
7 For a precise description of the geographic
boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5
nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1483
for developing plans to provide for
attainment of the NAAQS in this area.
The District works cooperatively with
the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) in preparing these plans.
Between 2007 and 2011, California
made six SIP submittals to address
nonattainment area planning
requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
in the SJV.8 We refer to these submittals
collectively as the ‘‘SJV PM2.5 SIP.’’ On
November 9, 2011, EPA approved all
elements of the SJV PM2.5 SIP except for
the contingency measures, which EPA
disapproved.9 As part of this action and
pursuant to CAA section 172(a)(2)(A),
EPA granted California’s request for an
extension of the attainment date for the
SJV area to April 5, 2015.10 EPA took
these actions in accordance with the
‘‘Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation
Rule,’’ which EPA issued in April 2007
to assist states in their development of
SIPs to meet the Act’s attainment
planning requirements for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS (hereafter ‘‘2007 PM2.5
Implementation Rule’’).11 In July 2013,
the State submitted a revised PM2.5
contingency measure plan for the SJV,
which EPA fully approved in May
2014.12
On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its
decision in a challenge by the Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to
EPA’s 2007 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule.13 In NRDC, the court held that
EPA erred in implementing the 1997
PM2.5 standards solely pursuant to the
general implementation requirements of
subpart 1, without also considering the
requirements specific to nonattainment
areas for particulate matter with a
diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) in
subpart 4, part D of title I of the CAA.
The court reasoned that the plain
meaning of the CAA requires
8 See
76 FR 69896 at n. 2 (November 9, 2011).
id. at 69924.
10 See id. Under CAA section 172(a)(2)(A), the
attainment date for a nonattainment area is ‘‘the
date by which attainment can be achieved as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five
years from the date such area was designated
nonattainment,’’ except that EPA may extend the
attainment date as appropriate for a period no
greater than ten years from the date of designation
as nonattainment, considering the severity of
nonattainment and the availability and feasibility of
pollution control measures. CAA section
172(a)(2)(A); see also 40 CFR 51.1004(a) and (b).
11 See 72 FR 20583 (April 25, 2007), codified at
40 CFR part 51, subpart Z. This rule was premised
on EPA’s prior interpretation of the Act as allowing
for implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS solely
pursuant to the general nonattainment area
provisions of subpart 1 and not the more specific
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment
areas in subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
12 See 79 FR 29327 (May 22, 2014).
13 See Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA,
706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
9 See
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1484
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
standards under subpart 4 because PM2.5
particles fall within the statutory
definition of PM10 and are thus subject
to the same statutory requirements as
PM10. The court remanded the rule and
instructed EPA ‘‘to repromulgate these
rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent
with this opinion.’’14
Consistent with the NRDC decision,
on June 2, 2014, EPA published a final
rule classifying all areas currently
designated nonattainment for the 1997
and/or 2006 PM2.5 standards as
Moderate under subpart 4.15 EPA also
established a deadline of December 31,
2014 for states to submit attainmentrelated and nonattainment new source
review (NNSR) SIP elements required
for these areas pursuant to subpart 4.16
This rulemaking did not affect any
action that EPA had previously taken
under section 110(k) of the Act on a SIP
for a PM2.5 nonattainment area.17
Accordingly, EPA’s previous approval
of the April 5, 2015 attainment date for
the SJV area remains in effect.18
Under section 188(b)(1) of the CAA,
prior to an area’s attainment date, EPA
has discretionary authority to reclassify
as a Serious nonattainment area ‘‘any
area that the Administrator determines
cannot practicably attain’’ the PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable Moderate area
attainment date.19 On September 25,
2014, the District requested that EPA
reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as
Serious nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 standards. This request included
a demonstration that the SJV cannot
practicably attain the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard by the April 5, 2015 attainment
date.20
II. Evaluation of Ambient PM2.5 Air
Quality Monitoring Data
A determination of whether an area’s
air quality currently meets the PM2.5
NAAQS is generally based upon the
most recent three years of complete,
quality-assured data gathered at
established State and Local Air
Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in a
nonattainment area and entered into
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS)
database. Data from air monitors
operated by state/local agencies in
compliance with EPA monitoring
requirements must be submitted to
AQS. Monitoring agencies annually
certify 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 areas.21
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.7
and in accordance with part 50,
appendix N, the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard is met when the ‘‘annual PM2.5
NAAQS design value’’ (based on the 3-
year average of PM2.5 annual mean mass
concentrations) 22 is less than or equal to
15.0 mg/m3 at each eligible monitoring
site. The 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard is
met when the ‘‘24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
design value’’ (based on the 3-year
average of annual 98th percentile 24hour PM2.5 mass concentrations) 23 is
less than or equal to 65 mg/m3 at each
eligible monitoring site.
A. PM2.5 Trends in the SJV
Ambient annual and 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS design value levels in the SJV
are the highest recorded in the United
States at 18.1 mg/m3 (Madera) and 65 mg/
m3 (Bakersfield), respectively, for the
2011–2013 period.24 The levels and
composition of ambient PM2.5 in the SJV
differ by season.25 Higher PM2.5
concentrations occur during the winter,
between late November and February,
when the SJV experiences extended
periods of stagnant weather with cold
foggy conditions which encourage wood
burning, a source of directly emitted
particulates (direct PM2.5), and are
conducive to the formation of
ammonium nitrate from the reaction of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) with ammonia.
Tables 1 and 2 show the annual and 24hour concentrations recorded at PM2.5
monitoring sites in the SJV during the
2005–2013 period.
TABLE 1—ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES a IN μg/m3 FOR MONITORS IN THE SJV
Site
AQS ID
Bakersfield:
Planz ..................................................
CA Ave ...............................................
Golden State Hwy ..............................
Corcoran ....................................................
Hanford ......................................................
Visalia ........................................................
Fresno:
Pacific .................................................
Garland ..............................................
Clovis .........................................................
Tranquility ..................................................
Madera ......................................................
Merced:
M Street .............................................
Coffee .................................................
2009
2010
2011
20.3
19.6
19.2
17.6
n/a
19.3
21.5
20.9
18.8
17.0
n/a
19.7
22.6
21.0
19.3
17.3
n/a
18.8
21.2
18.4
n/a
17.1
n/a
16.5
18.2
16.5
n/a
16.2
n/a
15.2
60195025
60190011
60195001
60192009
60392010
17.2
16.9
17.1
n/a
n/a
17.2
16.6
16.4
n/a
n/a
17.1
17.4
16.4
n/a
n/a
17.0
17.7
16.3
n/a
n/a
16.0
17.1
17.0
n/a
n/a
14.9
15.2
16.4
n/a
n/a
14.5
14.5
17.0
n/a
n/a
60472510
60470003
15.0
n/a
14.7
n/a
14.7
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
11.7
18.2
17 Id.
at 31569.
see also 79 FR 29327 at 29329 (May 22,
2014) (noting that ‘‘[a]bsent an EPA rulemaking to
withdraw or revise [the November 9, 2011] final
rule, which NRDC does not compel, our final action
on the SJV PM2.5 SIP remains effective . . .’’).
19 Section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general
expression of delegated rulemaking authority. See
‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16,
1992) (hereafter ‘‘General Preamble’’) at 13537, n.
15. Although subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section
188(b)(1) mandate that EPA reclassify by specified
timeframes any areas that it determines appropriate
for reclassification by those dates, these
18 Id.;
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2008
18.9
18.5
18.6
17.2
n/a
18.2
16 Id.
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
2007
18.4
18.0
19.0
17.0
n/a
18.0
79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2006
60290016
60290014
60290010
60310004
60311004
61072002
14 Id.
15 See
2005
Jkt 235001
subparagraphs do not restrict the general authority
but simply specify that, at a minimum, EPA’s
authority must be exercised at certain times. See id.
20 See letter dated September 25, 2014 from Seyed
Sadredin, Executive Director/Air Pollution Control
Officer, SJVUAPCD, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9, ‘‘RE: San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Request for Reclassification of the San Joaquin
Valley as a Serious PM2.5 Nonattainment Area for
the Federal 1997 PM2.5 Standard,’’ attaching
Memorandum dated August 21, 2014 from Seyed
Sadredin, Executive Director/APCO and Sheraz
Gill, Project Coordinator, to the SJVUAPCD
Governing Board, ‘‘RE: Item Number 9: Review and
Approve Actions to Address Air Quality Impacts
Resulting from the Exceptional Weather Conditions
Caused by the Recent Drought’’ (hereafter
‘‘Sadredin Memo’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2012
15.6
14.5
n/a
n/a
15.8
14.8
2013
17.3
16.4
n/a
n/a
17.0
16.6
13.8
14.7
b 14.3
b 15.4
16.0
7.4
19.0
16.4
7.8
18.1
10.4
14.3
11.1
13.3
21 See 40 CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, appendix L;
40 CFR part 50, appendix N; 40 CFR part 53; 40
CFR part 58; and 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C,
D, and E.
22 See 40 CFR part 50, appendix N (section 1.0).
23 See id.
24 See U.S. EPA, 2013 Design Value Reports,
PM2.5 Detailed Information Updated 8/24/14,
available at https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/
values.html (‘‘PM25_DesignValues_20112013_
FINAL_08_28_14’’) (hereafter ‘‘2013 p.m.2.5 Design
Value Reports’’). The Bakersfield monitor also
recorded the nation’s second highest annual PM2.5
NAAQS design value (17.3 mg/m3) during this
period. See id.
25 See 76 FR 41338 at 41339 (July 13, 2011)
(proposed action on SJV PM2.5 Plan).
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1485
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES a IN μg/m3 FOR MONITORS IN THE SJV—Continued
Site
AQS ID
Turlock .......................................................
Modesto .....................................................
Manteca .....................................................
Stockton ....................................................
60990006
60990005
60772010
60771002
2005
n/a
14.0
n/a
13.1
2006
n/a
14.1
n/a
12.9
2007
n/a
14.6
n/a
12.8
2008
2009
n/a
15.3
n/a
13.5
n/a
14.7
n/a
12.9
2010
n/a
n/a
n/a
12.1
2011
15.3
n/a
n/a
11.1
2012
2013
14.9
12.9
n/a
11.4
15.7
13.6
10.2
13.8
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports. The term ‘‘n/a’’ means monitoring data is not available or does not meet minimum data completeness requirements (40
CFR part 50, appendix N).
a The annual PM
2.5 NAAQS design value for each monitor is based on the 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix N.
For example, the annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value for 2013 for each monitor is the average of the annual mean PM2.5 concentrations for 2011, 2012, and 2013 at
that monitor. The 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is attained when the design value at each eligible monitor is 15.0 μg/m3 or less.
b The Garland site was approved for replaced operation of the First Street site (AQS ID: 60190008) beginning with data collected in calendar year 2012. The design
value reported represents a combined site record with the existing Garland site and old First Street site which ceased operation in early 2012.
TABLE 2—24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES a IN μg/m3 FOR MONITORS IN THE SJV
Site
AQS ID
Bakersfield:
Planz ..................................................
CA Ave ...............................................
Golden State Hwy ..............................
Corcoran ....................................................
Hanford ......................................................
Visalia ........................................................
Fresno:
Pacific .................................................
Garland ..............................................
Clovis .........................................................
Tranquility ..................................................
Madera ......................................................
Merced:
M Street .............................................
Coffee .................................................
Turlock .......................................................
Modesto .....................................................
Manteca .....................................................
Stockton ....................................................
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
60290016
60290014
60290010
60310004
60311004
61072002
54
58
60
55
n/a
55
60
62
64
58
n/a
56
68
66
69
61
n/a
58
70
66
64
52
n/a
57
70
68
66
53
n/a
59
65
62
64
49
n/a
51
55
62
n/a
46
n/a
47
60195025
60190011
60195001
60192009
60392010
57
60
55
n/a
n/a
59
58
56
n/a
n/a
61
63
58
n/a
n/a
52
58
54
n/a
n/a
50
60
53
n/a
n/a
43
54
47
n/a
n/a
48
58
54
n/a
n/a
60472510
60470003
60990006
60990005
60772010
60771002
45
n/a
n/a
49
n/a
40
45
n/a
n/a
51
n/a
41
48
n/a
n/a
55
n/a
45
50
n/a
n/a
54
n/a
51
51
n/a
n/a
55
n/a
50
45
n/a
55
49
n/a
44
39
43
51
50
n/a
38
2012
2013
47
58
n/a
43
54
47
60
65
n/a
49
60
56
53
63
b 59
b 62
54
31
51
58
30
52
40
41
49
44
38
36
49
42
53
51
37
45
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports. The term ‘‘n/a’’ means monitoring data is not available or does not meet minimum data completeness requirements (40
CFR part 50, appendix N).
a The 24-hour PM
2.5 NAAQS design value for each monitor is based on the 3-year average of annual 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations. See 40 CFR
part 50, appendix N. For example, the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value for 2013 for each monitor is the average of the 98th percentile PM2.5 concentrations for
2011, 2012, and 2013 at that monitor. The 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is attained when the design value at each eligible monitor is 65 μg/m3 or less.
b The Garland site was approved for replaced operation of the First Street site (AQS ID: 60190008) beginning with data collected in calendar year 2012. The design
value reported represents a combined site record with the existing Garland site and old First Street site which ceased operation in early 2012.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Impracticability of Attaining the 1997
Annual PM2.5 Standard by April 5, 2015
In its September 25, 2014 letter to
EPA, the District provided ambient air
quality data showing that the SJV area
cannot attain the 1997 PM2.5 annual
standard by April 5, 2015.26
Specifically, the District provided
annual average PM2.5 concentrations
recorded at monitoring sites in the SJV
for 2012 and 2013, and then calculated
the maximum 2014 annual average
concentration for each monitoring site
that would result in a 3-year average
PM2.5 concentration of 15.0 mg/m3 at
that site. According to the District, the
maximum 2014 annual average
concentration at the Bakersfield-Planz
site (which recorded the area’s highest
annual concentrations in 2013) that will
enable the site to show a design value
at or below 15.0 mg/m3 for 2014 is 7.5
mg/m3.27 The annual average value for a
given year is calculated based on the
quarterly averages for that year.28 The
District reported that the average PM2.5
concentration measured at the
Bakersfield-Planz site in the first quarter
of 2014, however, was 29.7 mg/m3.29
Thus, according to the District, average
PM2.5 concentrations at this monitoring
site for the remaining three quarters of
2014 would have to be zero in order to
result in a design value at or below 15.0
mg/m3 for 2014.30 The remaining three
quarters of 2014 include November and
December, which, like other winter
months in the SJV, tend to experience
high PM2.5 concentrations. These
preliminary data and analyses indicate
that it is not possible for the BakersfieldPlanz monitoring site to show an annual
PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below
15.0 mg/m3 by April 5, 2015.
EPA also independently evaluated
preliminary 2014 PM2.5 air quality data
available in AQS as of August 2014 to
28 40
Sadredin Memo at 2–6.
27 Id. at Table 3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.4.
Sadredin Memo at Table 4.
29 See
26 See
assess the District’s representations.31
Table 3 shows four monitoring locations
for which preliminary 2014 AQS data
already indicate that the 3-year average
PM2.5 concentration for 2012–2014 will
likely be well above 15.0 mg/m3.
Specifically, for each of these
monitoring sites, EPA calculated the
maximum 2014 average PM2.5
concentration that would enable the site
to show a 2014 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
design value at or below 15.0 mg/m3.32
31 See Memorandum from Elfego Felix and Scott
Bohning to Docket entitled ‘‘Practicability of SJV
2014 attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ dated
December 10, 2014 with attachment entitled ‘‘SJV
PM2 5 1997 std impracticable 2014–12–10.xlsx’’
(hereafter ‘‘Felix and Bohning Memo’’).
32 The small differences between the District’s
and EPA’s calculations of ‘‘maximum 2014’’ values
are due to the use of different rounding
conventions. EPA’s calculations of maximum 2014
values are based on the rounding convention in 40
CFR part 50, appendix N, which provides that
intermediate calculations are not rounded, and that
a design value with a decimal lower than 15.05 mg/
m3 is rounded down to 15.0 mg/m3. See 40 CFR part
50, appendix N, section 4.3. In computing the
maximum 2014 concentration consistent with
attainment and consistent with 2012 and 2013
30 Id.
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Continued
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1486
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
As shown in Table 3, the 2014 annual
average PM2.5 concentration at the
Visalia, Corcoran, and Hanford sites
would have to be nearly 20 percent
lower than the lowest annual averages
observed at each of those sites during
the 2003–2013 period, and the 2014
annual average PM2.5 concentration at
the Bakersfield-Planz site would have to
be nearly 50 percent lower than the
lowest annual average observed during
that same period, in order to result in a
2014 annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value
at or below 15.0 mg/m3.33
TABLE 3—PRELIMINARY RECORDED 2014 ANNUAL AVERAGE PM2.5 CONCENTRATIONS (IN μg/m3) FOR SELECTED SITES IN
SJV AND COMPARISON TO LOWEST RECORDED CONCENTRATIONS
EPA estimate for
max 2014 annual
average
allowed to
attain b
Average
recorded
2014 a
Bakersfield—Planz ...........................................................................
Visalia ..............................................................................................
Corcoran ..........................................................................................
Hanford ............................................................................................
29.7
27.9
22.9
18.7
Lowest
recorded
annual
average (year) b
7.7
11.4
13.0
12.1
14.5
13.6
15.6
14.8
(2011)
(2010)
(2013)
(2012)
Percent
difference
between max
2014 and
lowest
recorded annual
verage
47
16
16
18
a Source: U.S. EPA, Air Quality System, Combined Site Sample Values Report, PM , 2014 (Report Date: August 7, 2014) (preliminary 2014
2.5
1st quarter data for all identified sites and 2nd quarter data for Hanford site).
b See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
If 2014 monitoring data is timely
certified by May 1, 2015 (see 40 CFR
58.15) and EPA’s determination of
whether the SJV area meets the PM2.5
NAAQS occurs after this date, the
determination would be based on
monitoring data for the 2012–2014
period as this would be the most recent
3-year period for which complete,
quality-assured and certified monitoring
data is available. Because a
determination of attainment requires
that each eligible monitoring site in the
area show a design value at or below the
level of the PM2.5 NAAQS (see 40 CFR
part 50, § 50.7 and appendix N), a 2014
design value above this level at one
eligible monitor would render
attainment by April 5, 2015 impossible.
In sum, air quality data for the 2003–
2014 period indicate that it is not
practicable for the Bakersfield-Planz
monitoring site to show an annual PM2.5
NAAQS design value at or below 15.0
mg/m3 by April 5, 2015, and that the SJV
C. Impracticability of Attaining the 1997
24-Hour PM2.5 Standard by April 5,
2015
The District’s September 25, 2014
letter did not specifically address the
SJV area’s ability to attain the 24-hour
PM2.5 standard by April 5, 2015. EPA
independently reviewed ambient air
quality data available in AQS, however,
to consider whether the SJV area can
practicably attain the 24-hour standard
by this date.
Table 4 shows the 98th percentile 24hour average PM2.5 concentrations
recorded in 2012 and 2013 at selected
monitoring sites. The 98th percentile
24-hour concentrations in 2013 were
higher than in 2012, and in some cases
the 2013 value was significantly higher
than the 2012 value, e.g., at the
Bakersfield-Planz monitoring site.35
Based on these observed 98th percentile
values in 2012 and 2013, EPA
calculated for each of these monitoring
sites the maximum 98th percentile 24hour concentration in 2014 that would
enable the site to show a 2014 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below
65 mg/m3. EPA also calculated a low
estimate of the 98th percentile 24-hour
concentration for 2014 at each of these
sites, based on preliminary data
reported to AQS for the first quarter of
2014 and a conservative assumption
that 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations
remain below these levels for the
remainder of the year at each
monitoring site.36 As shown in Table 4,
EPA’s low estimates of the 98th
percentile concentrations for 2014 at the
two monitoring sites in Bakersfield
(Planz and California Avenue) already
exceed the maximum 2014 values that
would enable these two sites to show a
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value for
2014 at or below 65 mg/m3. Thus, these
two monitoring sites in Bakersfield
cannot practicably show a 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS design value at or below 65 mg/
m3 by April 5, 2015.
annual mean concentrations, EPA did not round the
2012 and 2013 means in the intermediate steps of
the calculation, and used 15.04 as the highest
design value consistent with the standard. In
contrast, the Sadredin memo rounded 2012 and
2013 means to one decimal place initially, and used
15.00 as the highest attaining design value.
33 See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment.
34 Any reclassification of a Moderate PM
2.5
nonattainment area as Serious based on a
determination that the area cannot practicably
attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date
will be based on the facts and circumstances of the
particular nonattainment area at issue. Monitored
air quality and the reductions in ambient
concentrations that the area would need to achieve
in order to monitor attainment are important
factors. Another important factor is whether
additional control measures could be implemented
in time and reduce emissions adequately to attain
the NAAQS. Given the significant reductions in
ambient PM2.5 levels that the SJV nonattainment
area would need to monitor attainment, and the
extremely short time remaining before the
applicable attainment date for this area (April 5,
2015), EPA focused its analysis in this proposal on
air quality-related information.
35 The Sadredin Memo cites weather conditions
associated with the extreme drought in California,
including low precipitation, high stagnation, and
strong inversions, among the reasons for the high
PM2.5 concentrations observed in the winter of
2013–2014. See Sadredin Memo at 3–7.
36 Identification of the 98th percentile 24-hour
concentration is based on the number of creditable
samples in a given year. See 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, section 4.5. Specifically, in any year
for which there are at least 351 creditable samples,
the 98th percentile is the 8th highest concentration,
and as the number of creditable samples decreases
the 98th percentile concentration increases. See id.
at Table 1. To calculate a low estimate of the 98th
percentile 24-hour concentration for 2014 at each
monitoring site, EPA assumed conservatively that
preliminary 2014 monitoring data available in AQS
(see Table 4) represented the highest values for
2014 (i.e., no higher values would be recorded at
these sites for the remainder of 2014) and that the
total number of creditable samples in 2014 would
be consistent with the sampling frequency observed
as of August 7, 2014. See Felix and Bohning Memo
and attachment. We note that 2014 monitoring data
is not due for certification until May 1, 2015. See
40 CFR 58.15.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
area cannot practicably attain the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by this date.34
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1487
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—PRELIMINARY RECORDED 2014 24-HOUR PM2.5 CONCENTRATIONS (IN μg/m3) FOR SELECTED SITES IN SJV
AND CALCULATION OF 98TH PERCENTILE VALUES
98th percentile
in 2012 a
98th percentile
in 2013 a
40.6
56.4
48.3
51.3
52.6
96.7
71.8
67.6
71.6
63.8
Bakersfield—Planz ...........................................................................................
Bakersfield—CA Ave .......................................................................................
Hanford ............................................................................................................
Fresno—Pacific ................................................................................................
Fresno—Garland .............................................................................................
Low estimate
of 98th
percentile in
2014 b
64.4
72.6
76.7
61.8
65.5
Max 98th
percentile
allowed in
2014 to
attain b
58.9
68.0
80.3
73.3
79.8
a Source:
See 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports.
Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment (calculations based on preliminary 2014 1st quarter data for all identified sites and 2nd quarter
data for Hanford site).
b See
If 2014 monitoring data is timely
certified by May 1, 2015 (see 40 CFR
58.15) and EPA’s determination of
whether the SJV area meets the PM2.5
NAAQS occurs after this date, the
determination would be based on
monitoring data for the 2012–2014
period as this would be the most recent
3-year period for which complete,
quality-assured and certified monitoring
data is available. Because a
determination of attainment requires
that each eligible monitoring site in the
area show a design value at or below the
level of the PM2.5 NAAQS (see 40 CFR
part 50, § 50.7 and appendix N), a 2014
design value above this level at one
eligible monitor would render
attainment by April 5, 2015 impossible.
In sum, air quality data for the 2003–
2014 period indicate that it is not
practicable for the two Bakersfield
monitoring sites to show a 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below
65 mg/m3 by April 5, 2015, and that the
SJV area cannot practicably attain the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by this
date.37
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Reclassification as Serious
Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Dates
Section 188 of the Act outlines the
process for classification of PM2.5
nonattainment areas and establishes the
applicable attainment dates. In
accordance with section 188 and in
response to the NRDC decision, EPA
classified the SJV area as Moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, effective July 2, 2014.38 This
classification rulemaking did not affect
any prior action that EPA had taken
under CAA section 110(k) on a PM2.5
attainment plan for a nonattainment
area. Accordingly, the April 5, 2015
attainment date that EPA approved on
November 9, 2011 for the SJV area
37 See
38 See
note 34 supra.
79 FR 31566 at 31587, 31593 (June 2, 2014).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
remains the applicable attainment date
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in this
area.39
Under the plain meaning of the terms
of section 188(b)(1) of the Act, EPA has
general authority to reclassify at any
time before the applicable attainment
date any area that EPA determines
cannot practicably attain the standard
by such date. Accordingly, section
188(b)(1) of the Act is a general
expression of delegated rulemaking
authority. In addition, subparagraphs
(A) and (B) of section 188(b)(1) mandate
that EPA reclassify ‘‘appropriate’’ PM10
nonattainment areas at specified time
frames (i.e., by December 31, 1991 for
the initial PM10 nonattainment areas,
and within 18 months after the SIP
submittal due date for subsequent
nonattainment areas). These
subparagraphs do not restrict EPA’s
general authority but simply specify
that, at a minimum, it must be exercised
at certain times.40 In accordance with
section 188(b)(1) of the Act, EPA is
proposing to reclassify the SJV area from
Moderate to Serious nonattainment for
the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
standards of 15.0 and 65 mg/m3,
respectively, based on EPA’s
determination that the SJV area cannot
practicably attain these standards by the
applicable attainment date of April 5,
2015.
Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the
attainment date for a Serious area ‘‘shall
be as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than the end of the tenth calendar
year beginning after the area’s
designation as nonattainment. . . .’’ The
SJV area was designated nonattainment
for the 1997 PM2.5 standards effective
April 5, 2005.41 Therefore, upon final
reclassification of the SJV area as a
39 See
notes 17 and 18, supra.
a general discussion of EPA’s interpretation
of the reclassification provisions in section
188(b)(1) of the Act, see the General Preamble, 57
FR 13498 at 13537–38 (April 16, 1992).
41 See 70 FR 944 at 956, 957 (January 5, 2005).
40 For
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Serious nonattainment area, the latest
permissible attainment date under
section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for purposes
of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in this area,
will be December 31, 2015.
Under section 188(e) of the Act, a
state may apply to EPA for a single
extension of the Serious area attainment
date by up to 5 years, which EPA may
grant if the State satisfies certain
conditions. Before EPA may extend the
attainment date for a Serious area under
section 188(e), the State must: (1) Apply
for an extension of the attainment date
beyond the statutory attainment date; (2)
demonstrate that attainment by the
statutory attainment date is
impracticable; (3) have complied with
all requirements and commitments
pertaining to the area in the
implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the Administrator that
the plan for the area includes the most
stringent measures that are included in
the implementation plan of any State or
are achieved in practice in any State,
and can feasibly be implemented in the
area; and (5) submit a demonstration of
attainment by the most expeditious
alternative date practicable.42 As more
fully described in Section V of this
proposal, EPA anticipates that
California may choose to submit a
request for an extension of the Serious
area attainment date consistent with
42 For a discussion of EPA’s interpretation of the
requirements of section 188(e), see ‘‘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) (hereafter ‘‘Addendum’’) at 42002; 65 FR
19964 (April 13, 2000) (proposed action on PM10
Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 66 FR 50252
(October 2, 2001) (proposed action on PM10 Plan for
Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 (July 25,
2002) (final action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa
County, Arizona); and Vigil v. EPA, 366 F.3d 1025,
amended at 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) (remanding
EPA action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County,
Arizona but generally upholding EPA’s
interpretation of CAA section 188(e)).
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1488
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
best ensures public health protection
from the adverse effects of PM2.5
pollution. Therefore, it is generally
counterproductive from an air quality
IV. Reclassification of Areas of Indian
and planning perspective to have a
Country 43
disparate classification for an area
Eight Indian tribes are located within
located within the boundaries of a larger
the boundaries of the San Joaquin
nonattainment area, such as the areas of
Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area: the Big Indian country contained within the SJV
Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of
PM2.5 nonattainment area. Moreover,
California, the Cold Springs Rancheria
violations of the 1997 PM2.5 standards,
of Mono Indians of California, the North which are measured and modeled
Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of
throughout the nonattainment area, as
California, the Picayune Rancheria of
well as shared meteorological
Chukchansi Indians of California, the
conditions, would dictate the same
Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi
conclusion. Furthermore, emissions
Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain
increases in portions of a PM2.5
Rancheria of California, the Tejon
nonattainment area that are left
Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian
classified as Moderate could counteract
Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
the effects of efforts to attain the
We have considered the relevance of
standards within the overall area
our proposal to reclassify the SJV
because less stringent requirements
nonattainment area as Serious for the
would apply in those Moderate portions
1997 PM2.5 standards to each tribe
relative to those that would apply in the
located within the SJV area. We believe
portions of the area reclassified to
that the same facts and circumstances
Serious.
Uniformity of classification
that support the proposal for the nonthroughout a nonattainment area is thus
Indian country lands also support the
a guiding principle and premise when
proposal for Indian country located
within the SJV nonattainment area. EPA an area is being reclassified. Equally, if
EPA believes it is likely that a given
is therefore proposing to exercise our
nonattainment area will not attain the
authority under CAA section 188(b)(1)
PM2.5 standards by the applicable
to reclassify areas of Indian country
attainment date, then it may be an
geographically located in the SJV
additional reason why it is appropriate
nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1)
to maintain a uniform classification
broadly authorizes EPA to reclassify a
nonattainment area—including any area within the area and thus to reclassify
the Indian country together with the
of Indian country located within such
balance of the nonattainment area. In
area—that EPA determines cannot
this particular case, we are proposing to
practicably attain the relevant standard
determine, based on the State’s
by the applicable attainment date.
demonstration and current ambient air
Elevated PM2.5 levels are a pervasive
quality trends, that the SJV
pollution problem throughout the SJV
nonattainment area in its entirety
area. Directly-emitted PM2.5 and its
cannot practicably attain the 1997 PM2.5
precursor pollutants (NOX, SOX, VOC,
and ammonia) are emitted throughout a standards by the applicable area
attainment date of April 5, 2015.
nonattainment area and can be
In light of the considerations outlined
transported throughout that
above that support retention of a
nonattainment area. Therefore,
uniformly-classified PM2.5
boundaries for nonattainment areas are
nonattainment area, and our finding that
drawn to encompass both areas with
is impracticable for the area to attain by
direct sources of the pollution problem
the applicable attainment date, we
as well as nearby areas in the same
propose to reclassify the areas of Indian
airshed. Initial classifications of
country areas within the San Joaquin
nonattainment areas are coterminous
Valley nonattainment area as Serious for
with, that is, they match exactly, their
boundaries. EPA believes this approach the 1997 PM2.5 standards.
The effect of reclassification would be
to lower the applicable ‘‘major source’’
43 ‘‘Indian country’’ as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151
emissions threshold for purposes of the
refers to: ‘‘(a) all land within the limits of any
Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the
nonattainment new source review
United States Government, notwithstanding the
program and the Title V operating
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way
permit program from its current level of
running through the reservation, (b) all dependent
100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA sections
Indian communities within the borders of the
United States whether within the original or
189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B)) thus subjecting
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and
more new or modified stationary
whether within or without the limits of a state, and
sources to these requirements. The
(c) all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which
have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way reclassification may also lower the de
running through the same.’’
minimis threshold under the CAA’s
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
these requirements when it submits a
Serious area attainment plan for the
1997 PM2.5 standards for this area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
General Conformity requirements (40
CFR part 93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to
70 tpy. Under the General Conformity
requirements, Federal agencies bear the
responsibility of determining
conformity of actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas that require
Federal permits, approvals, or funding.
Such permits, approvals or funding by
Federal agencies for projects in these
areas of Indian country may be more
difficult to obtain because of the lower
de minimis thresholds.
Given the potential implications of
the reclassification, EPA has contacted
tribal officials to invite government-togovernment consultation on this
rulemaking effort.44 EPA specifically
solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials. We
note that although eligible tribes may
opt to seek EPA approval of relevant
tribal programs under the CAA, none of
the affected tribes will be required to
submit an implementation plan to
address this reclassification.
V. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP
Requirements
Upon reclassification as a Serious
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, California will be required to
submit additional SIP revisions to
satisfy the statutory requirements that
apply to Serious areas, including the
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title
I of the Act.
The Serious area SIP elements that
California will be required to submit are
as follows:
1. Provisions to assure that the best
available control measures (BACM),
including best available control
technology (BACT) for stationary
sources, for the control of direct PM2.5
and PM2.5 precursors shall be
implemented no later than 4 years after
the area is reclassified (CAA section
189(b)(1)(B));
2. a demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the plan provides
for attainment as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December
31, 2015, or where the State is seeking
an extension of the attainment date
under section 188(e), a demonstration
that attainment by December 31, 2015 is
impracticable and that the plan provides
for attainment by the most expeditious
44 We sent letters to tribal officials of seven tribes
regarding government-to-government consultation
on September 30, 2014. EPA inadvertently did not
send a letter to the Tejon Indian Tribe, therefore,
concurrently with this proposed action, EPA is
sending a letter to the chairperson of the Tejon
Indian Tribe inviting consultation on our proposed
reclassification of the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area.
All eight letters can be found in the docket for this
proposed action.
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
alternative date practicable (CAA
sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
3. plan provisions that require
reasonable further progress (RFP) (CAA
section 172(c)(2));
4. quantitative milestones which are
to be achieved every 3 years until the
area is redesignated attainment and
which demonstrate RFP toward
attainment by the applicable date (CAA
section 189(c));
5. provisions to assure that control
requirements applicable to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to
major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors, except where the State
demonstrates to EPA’s satisfaction that
such sources do not contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed
the standard in the area (CAA section
189(e));
6. a comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
7. contingency measures to be
implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or to attain by the applicable
attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9));
and
8. a revision to the nonattainment
new source review (NSR) program to
lower the applicable ‘‘major stationary
source’’ 45 thresholds from 100 tons per
year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)).
Section 189(b)(2) states, in relevant
part, that the State must submit the
required BACM provisions ‘‘no later
than 18 months after reclassification of
the area as a Serious Area’’ and must
submit the required attainment
demonstration ‘‘no later than 4 years
after reclassification of the area to
Serious.’’ Thus, if a final reclassification
of the area to Serious becomes effective
in early 2015, the Act provides the State
with up to 18 months after this date (i.e.,
until late 2016) to submit a BACM
demonstration and up to 4 years after
this date (i.e., until early 2019) to submit
a Serious area attainment
demonstration. Given the December 31,
2015 Serious area attainment date for
the 1997 PM2.5 standards in this area
under CAA section 188(c)(2), however,
EPA expects the State to adopt and
submit a Serious area plan for the 1997
PM2.5 standards well before the statutory
SIP submittal deadlines in section
189(b)(2).
Additionally, in light of the available
ambient air quality data and the short
amount of time available before the
45 For any Serious area, the terms ‘‘major source’’
and ‘‘major stationary source’’ include any
stationary source that emits or has the potential to
emit at least 70 tons per year of PM10 (CAA section
189(b)(3)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
December 31, 2015 attainment date
under CAA section 188(c)(2), EPA
anticipates that California may choose
to submit a request for an extension of
the Serious area attainment date
pursuant to section 188(e)
simultaneously with its submittal of a
Serious area plan for the area. If
California fails to submit a request for
an extension of the Serious area
attainment date that satisfies the
requirements of section 188(e) and the
SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM2.5
standards by December 31, 2015, under
CAA section 189(d) the State would be
required to submit, within 12 months
after December 31, 2015, plan revisions
which provide for attainment of the
PM2.5 standards and, from the date of
such submission until attainment, for an
annual reduction in emissions within
the SJV area of not less than 5 percent
of the amount of such emissions as
reported in the most recent inventory
prepared for the area (hereafter ‘‘section
189(d) plan’’). If, however, California
submits and EPA approves a section
188(e) request for an extension of the
Serious area attainment date prior to the
December 31, 2015 attainment date for
the SJV area, the requirement to submit
a section 189(d) plan would not apply
unless and until the SJV area fails to
attain the 1997 PM2.5 standards by the
extended attainment date approved by
EPA under section 188(e).
The Act does not specify a deadline
for the State’s submittal of
nonattainment NSR program revisions
to lower the ‘‘major stationary source’’
threshold from 100 tons per year (tpy)
to 70 tpy (CAA section 189(b)(3))
following reclassification of a Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment under subpart 4.
Pursuant to EPA’s gap-filling authority
in CAA section 301(a) and to effectuate
the statutory control requirements in
section 189 of the Act, EPA proposes to
require the State to submit these
nonattainment NSR SIP revisions no
later than 12 months from the effective
date of final reclassification of the SJV
area as Serious nonattainment for the
1997 PM2.5 standards. We believe this
timeframe will give the state sufficient
time to make this relatively
straightforward revision to its
nonattainment NSR SIP while assuring
that new or modified major sources
locating in the SJV area will be subject
to the lower statutory major source
thresholds expeditiously. We are
requesting comment on this proposed
12-month timeframe for submission of
the nonattainment NSR SIP revisions.
As noted above, however, if California
intends to seek an extension of the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1489
Serious area attainment date, the State
will need to submit a request that
satisfies the requirements of CAA
section 188(e), including NSR SIP
provisions to implement the major
stationary source threshold in CAA
section 189(b)(3), in time for EPA to
approve such an extension prior to the
December 31, 2015 Serious area
attainment date.
Given the short amount of time
available for California’s development of
these SIP submittals, EPA anticipates
that the Serious area attainment
demonstration for the SJV area may rely
to some extent on existing
photochemical modeling analyses
developed for previous PM2.5 plan
submittals. EPA commits to work with
the District and CARB as they develop
the necessary technical support for the
Serious area plan and to provide
guidance on the requirements that
California must meet to qualify for an
extension of the Serious area attainment
date under CAA section 188(e).
EPA is currently developing a
proposed rulemaking to provide
guidance to states on the attainment
planning requirements in subparts 1 and
4 of part D, title I of the Act that apply
to areas designated nonattainment for
PM2.5. In the interim, EPA encourages
the State to review the General Preamble
and Addendum for guidance on how to
implement these statutory requirements
in the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area.46
VI. Summary of Proposed Action and
Request for Public Comment
Pursuant to section 188(b)(1) of the
Act, EPA is proposing to reclassify the
SJV nonattainment area from Moderate
to Serious nonattainment for the 1997
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards
based on EPA’s determination that the
area cannot practicably attain these
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date of April 5, 2015. This proposed
action is based upon EPA’s evaluation
of ambient air quality data for the 2003–
2014 period indicating that it is not
practicable for certain monitoring sites
within the SJV to show PM2.5 design
values at or below the level of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS by April 5, 2015. Upon
reclassification as a Serious
nonattainment area, California will be
required to submit a Serious area plan
that satisfies the requirements of part D
of title I of the Act, including a
demonstration that the plan provides for
attainment of the 1997 annual and 24hour PM2.5 standards in the SJV area by
the applicable attainment date, which is
46 See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992) and Addendum, 59 FR
41998 (August 16, 1994).
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1490
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
no later than December 31, 2015, or by
the most expeditious alternative date
practicable and no later than December
31, 2020, consistent with the
requirements of CAA sections 189(b)
and 188(e).
In addition, because EPA is proposing
to similarly reclassify areas of Indian
country within the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
standards, consistent with our proposed
reclassification of the surrounding nonIndian country lands, EPA has invited
consultation with interested tribes
concerning this issue. We note that
although eligible tribes may seek EPA
approval of relevant tribal programs
under the CAA, none of the affected
tribes will be required to submit an
implementation plan to address this
reclassification.
EPA is requesting public comment on
this proposed action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action under the terms of
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and Executive Order
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011),
and therefore was not submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review. Reclassification does
not itself create any new requirements,
and does not impose a materially
adverse impact under Executive Order
12866. With respect to lands under state
jurisdiction, this proposed
reclassification would trigger statutory
deadlines for the state to submit Serious
area plan elements. With respect to
Indian country, reclassifications do not
establish deadlines for air quality plans
or plan revisions because tribes are not
subject to implementation plan
submittal deadlines that apply to states
as a result of reclassifications.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521) because it
does not contain any information
collection activities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612. This action
will not impose any requirements on
small entities. The proposed rule would
require the state to adopt and submit
SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory
requirements that apply to Serious
areas, and would not itself directly
regulate any small entities. We continue
to be interested in the potential impacts
of the proposed rule on small entities
and welcome comments on issues
related to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538). This action itself imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments, or the private sector.
The proposed action would reclassify
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, which would trigger existing
statutory timeframes for the state to
submit SIP revisions. Such a
reclassification in and of itself does not
impose any federal intergovernmental
mandate. The proposed action would
not require any tribes to submit
implementation plans.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). The requirement to
submit SIP revisions to meet the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS is imposed by the CAA.
This proposed rule does not alter the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132
and consistent with EPA policy to
promote communications between EPA
and state and local governments, EPA
specifically solicits comments on this
proposed action from state and local
officials.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have Tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian Tribes.’’
Eight Indian tribes are located within
the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment
area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big
Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Cold Springs Rancheria
of Mono Indians of California, the North
Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Picayune Rancheria of
Chukchansi Indians of California, the
Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi
Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain
Rancheria of California, the Tejon
Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian
Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
EPA has concluded that this proposed
rule might have tribal implications for
the purposes of Executive Order 13175,
but that it would not impose substantial
direct compliance costs upon the tribes,
nor would it preempt tribal law. We
note that none of the tribes located in
the SJV nonattainment area has
requested eligibility to administer
programs under the Clean Air Act. The
proposed rule would affect EPA’s
implementation of the new source
review program because of the lower
‘‘major source’’ threshold triggered by
reclassification (70 tons per year for
direct PM2.5 and precursors to PM2.5).
The proposed rule may also affect new
or modified stationary sources proposed
in these areas that require Federal
permits, approvals, or funding. Such
projects are subject to the requirements
of EPA’s General Conformity rule, and
Federal permits, approvals, or funding
for the projects may be more difficult to
obtain because of the lower de minimis
thresholds triggered by reclassification.
Given these potential implications,
EPA contacted tribal officials during the
process of developing this proposed rule
to provide an opportunity for the tribes
to have meaningful and timely input
into its development. On September 30,
2014, we sent letters to leaders of the
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 7 / Monday, January 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
seven tribes with areas of Indian
country in the SJV nonattainment area
inviting government-to-government
consultation on the rulemaking effort.
We requested that the tribal leaders, or
their designated consultation
representatives, provide input or request
government-to-government consultation
by October 27, 2014. We did not receive
a response from any of the tribes. As
noted above, EPA inadvertently did not
send a letter to the Tejon Indian Tribe
prior to this proposed action. We
recognize that the proposed
reclassification may be of interest to
officials of the Tejon Indian Tribe and
we are contacting them presently to
offer them an opportunity for
government-to-government
consultation. We intend to continue
communicating with all eight tribes
located within the boundaries of the SJV
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS as we move forward developing
a final rule. EPA specifically solicits
additional comment on this proposed
rule from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This proposed action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it proposes only to reclassify
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, which would trigger additional
Serious area planning requirements
under the CAA. This proposed action
does not establish an environmental
standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
Jkt 235001
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2014–0038;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–BA13
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Proposed Endangered
Status for 21 Species and Proposed
Threatened Status for 2 Species in
Guam and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
Air pollution control, Incorporation
by reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 18, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2015–00309 Filed 1–9–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
public comment period and notice of
public hearings.
AGENCY:
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this action
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. This proposed action
would only reclassify the SJV
nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, which would trigger additional
Serious area planning requirements
under the CAA.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), recently
published a proposed listing for 21
plant and animal species from the
Mariana Islands (U.S. Territory of Guam
and the U.S. Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands) as
endangered species and 2 plant species
from the Mariana Islands as threatened
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act), and
announced a 60-day public comment
period on the proposed actions, ending
December 1, 2014. We now reopen the
public comment period for an
additional 30 days, and announce two
public hearings and four public
information meetings on our proposed
rule. We are taking these actions to
allow all interested parties additional
time and opportunity to comment on
the proposed rule.
DATES: Written Comments: We will
consider comments received or
postmarked on or before February 11,
2015, or provided at the public hearings.
Please note comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES)
must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the closing date. Any
comments that we receive after the
closing date may not be considered in
the final decision on the proposed rule.
Public Hearings and Information
Meetings:
SUMMARY:
Public information meetings
Guam: Tuesday, January 27, 2015, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
17:35 Jan 09, 2015
Fish and Wildlife Service
This action is not subject to the
requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) because it does not involve
technical standards.
Public hearings
VerDate Sep<11>2014
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Guam: Tuesday, January 27, 2015, from 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1491
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 7 (Monday, January 12, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1482-1491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00309]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0813; FRL-9921-22-Region 9]
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes;
California; San Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as Serious
Nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
reclassify the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Moderate nonattainment area,
including areas of Indian country within it, as a Serious nonattainment
area for the 1997 PM2.5 national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) based on EPA's determination that the area cannot
practicably attain these NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of
April 5, 2015. Upon final reclassification as a Serious area,
California will be required to submit a Serious area plan including a
demonstration that the plan provides for attainment of the 1997 annual
and 24-hour PM2.5 standards in the SJV area by the
applicable attainment date, which is no later than December 31, 2015,
or by the most expeditious alternative date practicable, in accordance
with the requirements of part D of title I of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must arrive by February 11, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0813, by one of the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
Email: lee.anita@epa.gov.
Mail or delivery: Anita Lee; Air Planning Office (AIR-2);
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9; 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, and
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to
EPA, your email address will be automatically captured and included as
part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comments due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment.
Docket: The index to the docket (docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2014-
0813) for this proposed rule is available electronically on the
[[Page 1483]]
www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (415) 972-3958,
lee.anita@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background for Proposed Action
II. Evaluation of Ambient PM2.5 Air Quality Monitoring
Data
III. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Dates
IV. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country
V. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
VI. Summary of Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for Proposed Action
On July 18, 1997, EPA established new national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5, particulate matter with a
diameter of 2.5 microns or less, including an annual standard of 15.0
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour (daily)
standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 98th percentile
24-hour PM2.5 concentrations.\1\ EPA established these
standards after considering substantial evidence from numerous health
studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with
exposures to PM2.5 concentrations above the levels of these
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997) and 40 CFR 50.7. Effective
December 18, 2006, EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by lowering the level to 35 [mu]g/m\3\. See 71 FR 61144
(October 17, 2006) and 40 CFR 50.13. Effective March 18, 2013, EPA
strengthened the annual PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the level
to 12 [micro]g/m\3\. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) and 40 CFR
50.18. In this preamble, all references to the PM2.5
NAAQS, unless otherwise specified, are to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ and annual standard of
15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ as codified in 40 CFR 50.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature
mortality. Other important health effects associated with
PM2.5 exposure include aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions,
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted
activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory
symptoms, as well as new evidence for more subtle indicators of
cardiovascular health. Individuals particularly sensitive to
PM2.5 exposure include older adults, people with heart and
lung disease, and children.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, No.
EPA/600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF, October 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a
solid or liquid particle (primary PM2.5 or direct
PM2.5) or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions from precursor emissions of nitrogen oxides,
sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia (secondary
PM2.5).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the
nation as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On January 5, 2005, EPA
published initial air quality designations for the 1997 annual and 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS, using air quality monitoring data for the
three-year periods of 2001-2003 and 2002-2004.\4\ These designations
became effective on April 5, 2005.\5\ EPA designated the San Joaquin
Valley (SJV) area as nonattainment for both the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard (15.0 [micro]g/m\3\) and the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 standard (65 [micro]g/m\3\).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
\5\ Id.
\6\ See 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area encompasses over 23,000
square miles and includes all or part of eight counties: San Joaquin,
Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and the valley
portion of Kern.\7\ The area is home to 4 million people and is the
nation's leading agricultural region. Stretching over 250 miles from
north to south and averaging 80 miles wide, it is partially enclosed by
the Coast Mountain range to the west, the Tehachapi Mountains to the
south, and the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or District) has
primary responsibility for developing plans to provide for attainment
of the NAAQS in this area. The District works cooperatively with the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) in preparing these plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For a precise description of the geographic boundaries of
the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area, see 40
CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between 2007 and 2011, California made six SIP submittals to
address nonattainment area planning requirements for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.\8\ We refer to these submittals
collectively as the ``SJV PM2.5 SIP.'' On November 9, 2011,
EPA approved all elements of the SJV PM2.5 SIP except for
the contingency measures, which EPA disapproved.\9\ As part of this
action and pursuant to CAA section 172(a)(2)(A), EPA granted
California's request for an extension of the attainment date for the
SJV area to April 5, 2015.\10\ EPA took these actions in accordance
with the ``Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule,'' which EPA
issued in April 2007 to assist states in their development of SIPs to
meet the Act's attainment planning requirements for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS (hereafter ``2007 PM2.5
Implementation Rule'').\11\ In July 2013, the State submitted a revised
PM2.5 contingency measure plan for the SJV, which EPA fully
approved in May 2014.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 76 FR 69896 at n. 2 (November 9, 2011).
\9\ See id. at 69924.
\10\ See id. Under CAA section 172(a)(2)(A), the attainment date
for a nonattainment area is ``the date by which attainment can be
achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five
years from the date such area was designated nonattainment,'' except
that EPA may extend the attainment date as appropriate for a period
no greater than ten years from the date of designation as
nonattainment, considering the severity of nonattainment and the
availability and feasibility of pollution control measures. CAA
section 172(a)(2)(A); see also 40 CFR 51.1004(a) and (b).
\11\ See 72 FR 20583 (April 25, 2007), codified at 40 CFR part
51, subpart Z. This rule was premised on EPA's prior interpretation
of the Act as allowing for implementation of the PM2.5
NAAQS solely pursuant to the general nonattainment area provisions
of subpart 1 and not the more specific provisions for particulate
matter nonattainment areas in subpart 4 of part D, title I of the
Act.
\12\ See 79 FR 29327 (May 22, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
issued its decision in a challenge by the Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC) to EPA's 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule.\13\
In NRDC, the court held that EPA erred in implementing the 1997
PM2.5 standards solely pursuant to the general
implementation requirements of subpart 1, without also considering the
requirements specific to nonattainment areas for particulate matter
with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) in subpart 4,
part D of title I of the CAA. The court reasoned that the plain meaning
of the CAA requires
[[Page 1484]]
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 standards under subpart 4
because PM2.5 particles fall within the statutory definition
of PM10 and are thus subject to the same statutory
requirements as PM10. The court remanded the rule and
instructed EPA ``to repromulgate these rules pursuant to Subpart 4
consistent with this opinion.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428
(D.C. Cir. 2013).
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the NRDC decision, on June 2, 2014, EPA published a
final rule classifying all areas currently designated nonattainment for
the 1997 and/or 2006 PM2.5 standards as Moderate under
subpart 4.\15\ EPA also established a deadline of December 31, 2014 for
states to submit attainment-related and nonattainment new source review
(NNSR) SIP elements required for these areas pursuant to subpart 4.\16\
This rulemaking did not affect any action that EPA had previously taken
under section 110(k) of the Act on a SIP for a PM2.5
nonattainment area.\17\ Accordingly, EPA's previous approval of the
April 5, 2015 attainment date for the SJV area remains in effect.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014).
\16\ Id.
\17\ Id. at 31569.
\18\ Id.; see also 79 FR 29327 at 29329 (May 22, 2014) (noting
that ``[a]bsent an EPA rulemaking to withdraw or revise [the
November 9, 2011] final rule, which NRDC does not compel, our final
action on the SJV PM2.5 SIP remains effective . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 188(b)(1) of the CAA, prior to an area's attainment
date, EPA has discretionary authority to reclassify as a Serious
nonattainment area ``any area that the Administrator determines cannot
practicably attain'' the PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
Moderate area attainment date.\19\ On September 25, 2014, the District
requested that EPA reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 standards. This request
included a demonstration that the SJV cannot practicably attain the
1997 annual PM2.5 standard by the April 5, 2015 attainment
date.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of
delegated rulemaking authority. See ``State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (hereafter
``General Preamble'') at 13537, n. 15. Although subparagraphs (A)
and (B) of section 188(b)(1) mandate that EPA reclassify by
specified timeframes any areas that it determines appropriate for
reclassification by those dates, these subparagraphs do not restrict
the general authority but simply specify that, at a minimum, EPA's
authority must be exercised at certain times. See id.
\20\ See letter dated September 25, 2014 from Seyed Sadredin,
Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer, SJVUAPCD, to Jared
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, ``RE: San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Request for
Reclassification of the San Joaquin Valley as a Serious
PM2.5 Nonattainment Area for the Federal 1997
PM2.5 Standard,'' attaching Memorandum dated August 21,
2014 from Seyed Sadredin, Executive Director/APCO and Sheraz Gill,
Project Coordinator, to the SJVUAPCD Governing Board, ``RE: Item
Number 9: Review and Approve Actions to Address Air Quality Impacts
Resulting from the Exceptional Weather Conditions Caused by the
Recent Drought'' (hereafter ``Sadredin Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Evaluation of Ambient PM2.5 Air Quality Monitoring Data
A determination of whether an area's air quality currently meets
the PM2.5 NAAQS is generally based upon the most recent
three years of complete, quality-assured data gathered at established
State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in a nonattainment area
and entered into EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. Data from air
monitors operated by state/local agencies in compliance with EPA
monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS. Monitoring agencies
annually certify 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 areas.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 40 CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, appendix L; 40 CFR part
50, appendix N; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58; and 40 CFR part 58,
appendices A, C, D, and E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.7 and in accordance with part
50, appendix N, the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard is met when
the ``annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value'' (based on the 3-year
average of PM2.5 annual mean mass concentrations) \22\ is
less than or equal to 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ at each eligible monitoring
site. The 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard is met when the ``24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value'' (based on the 3-year average
of annual 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 mass concentrations)
\23\ is less than or equal to 65 [micro]g/m\3\ at each eligible
monitoring site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See 40 CFR part 50, appendix N (section 1.0).
\23\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. PM2.5 Trends in the SJV
Ambient annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value
levels in the SJV are the highest recorded in the United States at 18.1
[mu]g/m\3\ (Madera) and 65 [mu]g/m\3\ (Bakersfield), respectively, for
the 2011-2013 period.\24\ The levels and composition of ambient
PM2.5 in the SJV differ by season.\25\ Higher
PM2.5 concentrations occur during the winter, between late
November and February, when the SJV experiences extended periods of
stagnant weather with cold foggy conditions which encourage wood
burning, a source of directly emitted particulates (direct
PM2.5), and are conducive to the formation of ammonium
nitrate from the reaction of nitrogen oxides (NOX) with
ammonia. Tables 1 and 2 show the annual and 24-hour concentrations
recorded at PM2.5 monitoring sites in the SJV during the
2005-2013 period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See U.S. EPA, 2013 Design Value Reports, PM2.5
Detailed Information Updated 8/24/14, available at https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html
(``PM25_DesignValues_20112013_FINAL_08_28_14'') (hereafter ``2013
p.m.2.5 Design Value Reports''). The Bakersfield monitor also
recorded the nation's second highest annual PM2.5 NAAQS
design value (17.3 [mu]g/m\3\) during this period. See id.
\25\ See 76 FR 41338 at 41339 (July 13, 2011) (proposed action
on SJV PM2.5 Plan).
Table 1--Annual PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS Design Values \a\ in [micro]g/m\3\ for Monitors in the SJV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site AQS ID 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bakersfield:
Planz................................. 60290016 18.4 18.9 20.3 21.5 22.6 21.2 18.2 15.6 17.3
CA Ave................................ 60290014 18.0 18.5 19.6 20.9 21.0 18.4 16.5 14.5 16.4
Golden State Hwy...................... 60290010 19.0 18.6 19.2 18.8 19.3 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Corcoran.................................. 60310004 17.0 17.2 17.6 17.0 17.3 17.1 16.2 n/a n/a
Hanford................................... 60311004 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 15.8 17.0
Visalia................................... 61072002 18.0 18.2 19.3 19.7 18.8 16.5 15.2 14.8 16.6
Fresno:
Pacific............................... 60195025 17.2 17.2 17.1 17.0 16.0 14.9 14.5 13.8 14.7
Garland............................... 60190011 16.9 16.6 17.4 17.7 17.1 15.2 14.5 \b\ 14.3 \b\ 15.4
Clovis.................................... 60195001 17.1 16.4 16.4 16.3 17.0 16.4 17.0 16.0 16.4
Tranquility............................... 60192009 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7.4 7.8
Madera.................................... 60392010 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 19.0 18.1
Merced:
M Street.............................. 60472510 15.0 14.7 14.7 n/a n/a n/a 11.7 10.4 11.1
Coffee................................ 60470003 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 18.2 14.3 13.3
[[Page 1485]]
Turlock................................... 60990006 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 15.3 14.9 15.7
Modesto................................... 60990005 14.0 14.1 14.6 15.3 14.7 n/a n/a 12.9 13.6
Manteca................................... 60772010 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10.2
Stockton.................................. 60771002 13.1 12.9 12.8 13.5 12.9 12.1 11.1 11.4 13.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports. The term ``n/a'' means monitoring data is not available or does not meet minimum data completeness requirements
(40 CFR part 50, appendix N).
\a\ The annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value for each monitor is based on the 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. See 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N. For example, the annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value for 2013 for each monitor is the average of the annual mean PM2.5 concentrations for
2011, 2012, and 2013 at that monitor. The 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is attained when the design value at each eligible monitor is 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ or
less.
\b\ The Garland site was approved for replaced operation of the First Street site (AQS ID: 60190008) beginning with data collected in calendar year
2012. The design value reported represents a combined site record with the existing Garland site and old First Street site which ceased operation in
early 2012.
Table 2--24-Hour PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS Design Values \a\ in [micro]g/m\3\ for Monitors in the SJV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site AQS ID 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bakersfield:
Planz................................. 60290016 54 60 68 70 70 65 55 47 60
CA Ave................................ 60290014 58 62 66 66 68 62 62 58 65
Golden State Hwy...................... 60290010 60 64 69 64 66 64 n/a n/a n/a
Corcoran.................................. 60310004 55 58 61 52 53 49 46 43 49
Hanford................................... 60311004 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 54 60
Visalia................................... 61072002 55 56 58 57 59 51 47 47 56
Fresno:
Pacific............................... 60195025 57 59 61 52 50 43 48 53 63
Garland............................... 60190011 60 58 63 58 60 54 58 \b\ 59 \b\ 62
Clovis.................................... 60195001 55 56 58 54 53 47 54 54 58
Tranquility............................... 60192009 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 31 30
Madera.................................... 60392010 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 51 52
Merced:
M Street.............................. 60472510 45 45 48 50 51 45 39 40 49
Coffee................................ 60470003 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 43 41 42
Turlock................................... 60990006 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 55 51 49 53
Modesto................................... 60990005 49 51 55 54 55 49 50 44 51
Manteca................................... 60772010 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 38 37
Stockton.................................. 60771002 40 41 45 51 50 44 38 36 45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports. The term ``n/a'' means monitoring data is not available or does not meet minimum data completeness requirements
(40 CFR part 50, appendix N).
\a\ The 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value for each monitor is based on the 3-year average of annual 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations. See 40
CFR part 50, appendix N. For example, the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value for 2013 for each monitor is the average of the 98th percentile PM2.5
concentrations for 2011, 2012, and 2013 at that monitor. The 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is attained when the design value at each eligible monitor is 65
[micro]g/m\3\ or less.
\b\ The Garland site was approved for replaced operation of the First Street site (AQS ID: 60190008) beginning with data collected in calendar year
2012. The design value reported represents a combined site record with the existing Garland site and old First Street site which ceased operation in
early 2012.
B. Impracticability of Attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
Standard by April 5, 2015
In its September 25, 2014 letter to EPA, the District provided
ambient air quality data showing that the SJV area cannot attain the
1997 PM2.5 annual standard by April 5, 2015.\26\
Specifically, the District provided annual average PM2.5
concentrations recorded at monitoring sites in the SJV for 2012 and
2013, and then calculated the maximum 2014 annual average concentration
for each monitoring site that would result in a 3-year average
PM2.5 concentration of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ at that site.
According to the District, the maximum 2014 annual average
concentration at the Bakersfield-Planz site (which recorded the area's
highest annual concentrations in 2013) that will enable the site to
show a design value at or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ for 2014 is 7.5 [mu]g/
m\3\.\27\ The annual average value for a given year is calculated based
on the quarterly averages for that year.\28\ The District reported that
the average PM2.5 concentration measured at the Bakersfield-
Planz site in the first quarter of 2014, however, was 29.7 [mu]g/
m\3\.\29\ Thus, according to the District, average PM2.5
concentrations at this monitoring site for the remaining three quarters
of 2014 would have to be zero in order to result in a design value at
or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ for 2014.\30\ The remaining three quarters of
2014 include November and December, which, like other winter months in
the SJV, tend to experience high PM2.5 concentrations. These
preliminary data and analyses indicate that it is not possible for the
Bakersfield-Planz monitoring site to show an annual PM2.5
NAAQS design value at or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ by April 5, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Sadredin Memo at 2-6.
\27\ Id. at Table 3.
\28\ 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.4.
\29\ See Sadredin Memo at Table 4.
\30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA also independently evaluated preliminary 2014 PM2.5
air quality data available in AQS as of August 2014 to assess the
District's representations.\31\ Table 3 shows four monitoring locations
for which preliminary 2014 AQS data already indicate that the 3-year
average PM2.5 concentration for 2012-2014 will likely be
well above 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. Specifically, for each of these monitoring
sites, EPA calculated the maximum 2014 average PM2.5
concentration that would enable the site to show a 2014 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\.\32\
[[Page 1486]]
As shown in Table 3, the 2014 annual average PM2.5
concentration at the Visalia, Corcoran, and Hanford sites would have to
be nearly 20 percent lower than the lowest annual averages observed at
each of those sites during the 2003-2013 period, and the 2014 annual
average PM2.5 concentration at the Bakersfield-Planz site
would have to be nearly 50 percent lower than the lowest annual average
observed during that same period, in order to result in a 2014 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Memorandum from Elfego Felix and Scott Bohning to
Docket entitled ``Practicability of SJV 2014 attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS'' dated December 10, 2014 with attachment
entitled ``SJV PM2 5 1997 std impracticable 2014-12-10.xlsx''
(hereafter ``Felix and Bohning Memo'').
\32\ The small differences between the District's and EPA's
calculations of ``maximum 2014'' values are due to the use of
different rounding conventions. EPA's calculations of maximum 2014
values are based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, which provides that intermediate calculations are not
rounded, and that a design value with a decimal lower than 15.05
[mu]g/m\3\ is rounded down to 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, section 4.3. In computing the maximum 2014 concentration
consistent with attainment and consistent with 2012 and 2013 annual
mean concentrations, EPA did not round the 2012 and 2013 means in
the intermediate steps of the calculation, and used 15.04 as the
highest design value consistent with the standard. In contrast, the
Sadredin memo rounded 2012 and 2013 means to one decimal place
initially, and used 15.00 as the highest attaining design value.
\33\ See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment.
Table 3--Preliminary Recorded 2014 Annual Average PM[ihel2].[ihel5] Concentrations (in [mu]g/m\3\) for Selected
Sites in SJV and Comparison to Lowest Recorded Concentrations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
EPA estimate for difference
Average recorded max 2014 annual Lowest recorded between max 2014
2014 \a\ average allowed annual average and lowest
to attain \b\ (year) \b\ recorded annual
verage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bakersfield--Planz...................... 29.7 7.7 14.5 (2011) 47
Visalia................................. 27.9 11.4 13.6 (2010) 16
Corcoran................................ 22.9 13.0 15.6 (2013) 16
Hanford................................. 18.7 12.1 14.8 (2012) 18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: U.S. EPA, Air Quality System, Combined Site Sample Values Report, PM2.5, 2014 (Report Date: August
7, 2014) (preliminary 2014 1st quarter data for all identified sites and 2nd quarter data for Hanford site).
\b\ See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment.
If 2014 monitoring data is timely certified by May 1, 2015 (see 40
CFR 58.15) and EPA's determination of whether the SJV area meets the
PM2.5 NAAQS occurs after this date, the determination would
be based on monitoring data for the 2012-2014 period as this would be
the most recent 3-year period for which complete, quality-assured and
certified monitoring data is available. Because a determination of
attainment requires that each eligible monitoring site in the area show
a design value at or below the level of the PM2.5 NAAQS (see
40 CFR part 50, Sec. 50.7 and appendix N), a 2014 design value above
this level at one eligible monitor would render attainment by April 5,
2015 impossible.
In sum, air quality data for the 2003-2014 period indicate that it
is not practicable for the Bakersfield-Planz monitoring site to show an
annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
by April 5, 2015, and that the SJV area cannot practicably attain the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by this date.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Any reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area as Serious based on a determination that the area
cannot practicably attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date will be based on the facts and circumstances of the particular
nonattainment area at issue. Monitored air quality and the
reductions in ambient concentrations that the area would need to
achieve in order to monitor attainment are important factors.
Another important factor is whether additional control measures
could be implemented in time and reduce emissions adequately to
attain the NAAQS. Given the significant reductions in ambient
PM2.5 levels that the SJV nonattainment area would need
to monitor attainment, and the extremely short time remaining before
the applicable attainment date for this area (April 5, 2015), EPA
focused its analysis in this proposal on air quality-related
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Impracticability of Attaining the 1997 24-Hour PM2.5
Standard by April 5, 2015
The District's September 25, 2014 letter did not specifically
address the SJV area's ability to attain the 24-hour PM2.5
standard by April 5, 2015. EPA independently reviewed ambient air
quality data available in AQS, however, to consider whether the SJV
area can practicably attain the 24-hour standard by this date.
Table 4 shows the 98th percentile 24-hour average PM2.5
concentrations recorded in 2012 and 2013 at selected monitoring sites.
The 98th percentile 24-hour concentrations in 2013 were higher than in
2012, and in some cases the 2013 value was significantly higher than
the 2012 value, e.g., at the Bakersfield-Planz monitoring site.\35\
Based on these observed 98th percentile values in 2012 and 2013, EPA
calculated for each of these monitoring sites the maximum 98th
percentile 24-hour concentration in 2014 that would enable the site to
show a 2014 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 65
[mu]g/m\3\. EPA also calculated a low estimate of the 98th percentile
24-hour concentration for 2014 at each of these sites, based on
preliminary data reported to AQS for the first quarter of 2014 and a
conservative assumption that 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations
remain below these levels for the remainder of the year at each
monitoring site.\36\ As shown in Table 4, EPA's low estimates of the
98th percentile concentrations for 2014 at the two monitoring sites in
Bakersfield (Planz and California Avenue) already exceed the maximum
2014 values that would enable these two sites to show a 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS design value for 2014 at or below 65 [mu]g/m\3\.
Thus, these two monitoring sites in Bakersfield cannot practicably show
a 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 65 [mu]g/m\3\
by April 5, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ The Sadredin Memo cites weather conditions associated with
the extreme drought in California, including low precipitation, high
stagnation, and strong inversions, among the reasons for the high
PM2.5 concentrations observed in the winter of 2013-2014.
See Sadredin Memo at 3-7.
\36\ Identification of the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration
is based on the number of creditable samples in a given year. See 40
CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.5. Specifically, in any year for
which there are at least 351 creditable samples, the 98th percentile
is the 8th highest concentration, and as the number of creditable
samples decreases the 98th percentile concentration increases. See
id. at Table 1. To calculate a low estimate of the 98th percentile
24-hour concentration for 2014 at each monitoring site, EPA assumed
conservatively that preliminary 2014 monitoring data available in
AQS (see Table 4) represented the highest values for 2014 (i.e., no
higher values would be recorded at these sites for the remainder of
2014) and that the total number of creditable samples in 2014 would
be consistent with the sampling frequency observed as of August 7,
2014. See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment. We note that 2014
monitoring data is not due for certification until May 1, 2015. See
40 CFR 58.15.
[[Page 1487]]
Table 4--Preliminary Recorded 2014 24-Hour PM2.5 Concentrations (in [mu]g/m\3\) for Selected Sites in SJV and
Calculation of 98th Percentile Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max 98th
98th 98th Low estimate percentile
percentile in percentile in of 98th allowed in
2012 \a\ 2013 \a\ percentile in 2014 to attain
2014 b b
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bakersfield--Planz.............................. 40.6 96.7 64.4 58.9
Bakersfield--CA Ave............................. 56.4 71.8 72.6 68.0
Hanford......................................... 48.3 67.6 76.7 80.3
Fresno--Pacific................................. 51.3 71.6 61.8 73.3
Fresno--Garland................................. 52.6 63.8 65.5 79.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Source: See 2013 PM2.5 Design Value Reports.
b See Felix and Bohning Memo and attachment (calculations based on preliminary 2014 1st quarter data for all
identified sites and 2nd quarter data for Hanford site).
If 2014 monitoring data is timely certified by May 1, 2015 (see 40
CFR 58.15) and EPA's determination of whether the SJV area meets the
PM2.5 NAAQS occurs after this date, the determination would
be based on monitoring data for the 2012-2014 period as this would be
the most recent 3-year period for which complete, quality-assured and
certified monitoring data is available. Because a determination of
attainment requires that each eligible monitoring site in the area show
a design value at or below the level of the PM2.5 NAAQS (see
40 CFR part 50, Sec. 50.7 and appendix N), a 2014 design value above
this level at one eligible monitor would render attainment by April 5,
2015 impossible.
In sum, air quality data for the 2003-2014 period indicate that it
is not practicable for the two Bakersfield monitoring sites to show a
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value at or below 65 [mu]g/m\3\
by April 5, 2015, and that the SJV area cannot practicably attain the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by this date.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See note 34 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Dates
Section 188 of the Act outlines the process for classification of
PM2.5 nonattainment areas and establishes the applicable
attainment dates. In accordance with section 188 and in response to the
NRDC decision, EPA classified the SJV area as Moderate nonattainment
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, effective July 2, 2014.\38\ This
classification rulemaking did not affect any prior action that EPA had
taken under CAA section 110(k) on a PM2.5 attainment plan
for a nonattainment area. Accordingly, the April 5, 2015 attainment
date that EPA approved on November 9, 2011 for the SJV area remains the
applicable attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in this
area.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See 79 FR 31566 at 31587, 31593 (June 2, 2014).
\39\ See notes 17 and 18, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the plain meaning of the terms of section 188(b)(1) of the
Act, EPA has general authority to reclassify at any time before the
applicable attainment date any area that EPA determines cannot
practicably attain the standard by such date. Accordingly, section
188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of delegated rulemaking
authority. In addition, subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 188(b)(1)
mandate that EPA reclassify ``appropriate'' PM10
nonattainment areas at specified time frames (i.e., by December 31,
1991 for the initial PM10 nonattainment areas, and within 18
months after the SIP submittal due date for subsequent nonattainment
areas). These subparagraphs do not restrict EPA's general authority but
simply specify that, at a minimum, it must be exercised at certain
times.\40\ In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, EPA is
proposing to reclassify the SJV area from Moderate to Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
standards of 15.0 and 65 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively, based on EPA's
determination that the SJV area cannot practicably attain these
standards by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ For a general discussion of EPA's interpretation of the
reclassification provisions in section 188(b)(1) of the Act, see the
General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 at 13537-38 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's
designation as nonattainment. . . .'' The SJV area was designated
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 standards effective April
5, 2005.\41\ Therefore, upon final reclassification of the SJV area as
a Serious nonattainment area, the latest permissible attainment date
under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for purposes of the 1997
PM2.5 standards in this area, will be December 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See 70 FR 944 at 956, 957 (January 5, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 188(e) of the Act, a state may apply to EPA for a
single extension of the Serious area attainment date by up to 5 years,
which EPA may grant if the State satisfies certain conditions. Before
EPA may extend the attainment date for a Serious area under section
188(e), the State must: (1) Apply for an extension of the attainment
date beyond the statutory attainment date; (2) demonstrate that
attainment by the statutory attainment date is impracticable; (3) have
complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area
in the implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Administrator that the plan for the area includes the most stringent
measures that are included in the implementation plan of any State or
are achieved in practice in any State, and can feasibly be implemented
in the area; and (5) submit a demonstration of attainment by the most
expeditious alternative date practicable.\42\ As more fully described
in Section V of this proposal, EPA anticipates that California may
choose to submit a request for an extension of the Serious area
attainment date consistent with
[[Page 1488]]
these requirements when it submits a Serious area attainment plan for
the 1997 PM2.5 standards for this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ For a discussion of EPA's interpretation of the
requirements of section 188(e), see ``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)
(hereafter ``Addendum'') at 42002; 65 FR 19964 (April 13, 2000)
(proposed action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County,
Arizona); 66 FR 50252 (October 2, 2001) (proposed action on
PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718
(July 25, 2002) (final action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa
County, Arizona); and Vigil v. EPA, 366 F.3d 1025, amended at 381
F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) (remanding EPA action on PM10
Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona but generally upholding EPA's
interpretation of CAA section 188(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to:
``(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the
borders of the United States whether within the original or
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eight Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the San
Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area: the Big Sandy
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of
Mono Indians of California, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California,
the Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain
Rancheria of California, the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River
Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
We have considered the relevance of our proposal to reclassify the
SJV nonattainment area as Serious for the 1997 PM2.5
standards to each tribe located within the SJV area. We believe that
the same facts and circumstances that support the proposal for the non-
Indian country lands also support the proposal for Indian country
located within the SJV nonattainment area. EPA is therefore proposing
to exercise our authority under CAA section 188(b)(1) to reclassify
areas of Indian country geographically located in the SJV nonattainment
area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly authorizes EPA to reclassify a
nonattainment area--including any area of Indian country located within
such area--that EPA determines cannot practicably attain the relevant
standard by the applicable attainment date.
Elevated PM2.5 levels are a pervasive pollution problem
throughout the SJV area. Directly-emitted PM2.5 and its
precursor pollutants (NOX, SOX, VOC, and ammonia)
are emitted throughout a nonattainment area and can be transported
throughout that nonattainment area. Therefore, boundaries for
nonattainment areas are drawn to encompass both areas with direct
sources of the pollution problem as well as nearby areas in the same
airshed. Initial classifications of nonattainment areas are coterminous
with, that is, they match exactly, their boundaries. EPA believes this
approach best ensures public health protection from the adverse effects
of PM2.5 pollution. Therefore, it is generally
counterproductive from an air quality and planning perspective to have
a disparate classification for an area located within the boundaries of
a larger nonattainment area, such as the areas of Indian country
contained within the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area. Moreover,
violations of the 1997 PM2.5 standards, which are measured
and modeled throughout the nonattainment area, as well as shared
meteorological conditions, would dictate the same conclusion.
Furthermore, emissions increases in portions of a PM2.5
nonattainment area that are left classified as Moderate could
counteract the effects of efforts to attain the standards within the
overall area because less stringent requirements would apply in those
Moderate portions relative to those that would apply in the portions of
the area reclassified to Serious.
Uniformity of classification throughout a nonattainment area is
thus a guiding principle and premise when an area is being
reclassified. Equally, if EPA believes it is likely that a given
nonattainment area will not attain the PM2.5 standards by
the applicable attainment date, then it may be an additional reason why
it is appropriate to maintain a uniform classification within the area
and thus to reclassify the Indian country together with the balance of
the nonattainment area. In this particular case, we are proposing to
determine, based on the State's demonstration and current ambient air
quality trends, that the SJV nonattainment area in its entirety cannot
practicably attain the 1997 PM2.5 standards by the
applicable area attainment date of April 5, 2015.
In light of the considerations outlined above that support
retention of a uniformly-classified PM2.5 nonattainment
area, and our finding that is impracticable for the area to attain by
the applicable attainment date, we propose to reclassify the areas of
Indian country areas within the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area
as Serious for the 1997 PM2.5 standards.
The effect of reclassification would be to lower the applicable
``major source'' emissions threshold for purposes of the nonattainment
new source review program and the Title V operating permit program from
its current level of 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA sections 189(b)(3) and
501(2)(B)) thus subjecting more new or modified stationary sources to
these requirements. The reclassification may also lower the de minimis
threshold under the CAA's General Conformity requirements (40 CFR part
93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under the General Conformity
requirements, Federal agencies bear the responsibility of determining
conformity of actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas that
require Federal permits, approvals, or funding. Such permits, approvals
or funding by Federal agencies for projects in these areas of Indian
country may be more difficult to obtain because of the lower de minimis
thresholds.
Given the potential implications of the reclassification, EPA has
contacted tribal officials to invite government-to-government
consultation on this rulemaking effort.\44\ EPA specifically solicits
additional comment on this proposed rule from tribal officials. We note
that although eligible tribes may opt to seek EPA approval of relevant
tribal programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes will be
required to submit an implementation plan to address this
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ We sent letters to tribal officials of seven tribes
regarding government-to-government consultation on September 30,
2014. EPA inadvertently did not send a letter to the Tejon Indian
Tribe, therefore, concurrently with this proposed action, EPA is
sending a letter to the chairperson of the Tejon Indian Tribe
inviting consultation on our proposed reclassification of the SJV
PM2.5 nonattainment area. All eight letters can be found
in the docket for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
Upon reclassification as a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, California will be required to submit
additional SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory requirements that
apply to Serious areas, including the requirements of subpart 4 of part
D, title I of the Act.
The Serious area SIP elements that California will be required to
submit are as follows:
1. Provisions to assure that the best available control measures
(BACM), including best available control technology (BACT) for
stationary sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years
after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
2. a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2015, or where the State is seeking an extension of
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that
attainment by December 31, 2015 is impracticable and that the plan
provides for attainment by the most expeditious
[[Page 1489]]
alternative date practicable (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
3. plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP)
(CAA section 172(c)(2));
4. quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years
until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate RFP
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
5. provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the
State demonstrates to EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
6. a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
7. contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section
172(c)(9)); and
8. a revision to the nonattainment new source review (NSR) program
to lower the applicable ``major stationary source'' \45\ thresholds
from 100 tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ For any Serious area, the terms ``major source'' and
``major stationary source'' include any stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 70 tons per year of
PM10 (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 189(b)(2) states, in relevant part, that the State must
submit the required BACM provisions ``no later than 18 months after
reclassification of the area as a Serious Area'' and must submit the
required attainment demonstration ``no later than 4 years after
reclassification of the area to Serious.'' Thus, if a final
reclassification of the area to Serious becomes effective in early
2015, the Act provides the State with up to 18 months after this date
(i.e., until late 2016) to submit a BACM demonstration and up to 4
years after this date (i.e., until early 2019) to submit a Serious area
attainment demonstration. Given the December 31, 2015 Serious area
attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5 standards in this area
under CAA section 188(c)(2), however, EPA expects the State to adopt
and submit a Serious area plan for the 1997 PM2.5 standards
well before the statutory SIP submittal deadlines in section 189(b)(2).
Additionally, in light of the available ambient air quality data
and the short amount of time available before the December 31, 2015
attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2), EPA anticipates that
California may choose to submit a request for an extension of the
Serious area attainment date pursuant to section 188(e) simultaneously
with its submittal of a Serious area plan for the area. If California
fails to submit a request for an extension of the Serious area
attainment date that satisfies the requirements of section 188(e) and
the SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM2.5 standards by
December 31, 2015, under CAA section 189(d) the State would be required
to submit, within 12 months after December 31, 2015, plan revisions
which provide for attainment of the PM2.5 standards and,
from the date of such submission until attainment, for an annual
reduction in emissions within the SJV area of not less than 5 percent
of the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent
inventory prepared for the area (hereafter ``section 189(d) plan'').
If, however, California submits and EPA approves a section 188(e)
request for an extension of the Serious area attainment date prior to
the December 31, 2015 attainment date for the SJV area, the requirement
to submit a section 189(d) plan would not apply unless and until the
SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM2.5 standards by the
extended attainment date approved by EPA under section 188(e).
The Act does not specify a deadline for the State's submittal of
nonattainment NSR program revisions to lower the ``major stationary
source'' threshold from 100 tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)) following reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment under subpart 4. Pursuant
to EPA's gap-filling authority in CAA section 301(a) and to effectuate
the statutory control requirements in section 189 of the Act, EPA
proposes to require the State to submit these nonattainment NSR SIP
revisions no later than 12 months from the effective date of final
reclassification of the SJV area as Serious nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 standards. We believe this timeframe will give the
state sufficient time to make this relatively straightforward revision
to its nonattainment NSR SIP while assuring that new or modified major
sources locating in the SJV area will be subject to the lower statutory
major source thresholds expeditiously. We are requesting comment on
this proposed 12-month timeframe for submission of the nonattainment
NSR SIP revisions. As noted above, however, if California intends to
seek an extension of the Serious area attainment date, the State will
need to submit a request that satisfies the requirements of CAA section
188(e), including NSR SIP provisions to implement the major stationary
source threshold in CAA section 189(b)(3), in time for EPA to approve
such an extension prior to the December 31, 2015 Serious area
attainment date.
Given the short amount of time available for California's
development of these SIP submittals, EPA anticipates that the Serious
area attainment demonstration for the SJV area may rely to some extent
on existing photochemical modeling analyses developed for previous
PM2.5 plan submittals. EPA commits to work with the District
and CARB as they develop the necessary technical support for the
Serious area plan and to provide guidance on the requirements that
California must meet to qualify for an extension of the Serious area
attainment date under CAA section 188(e).
EPA is currently developing a proposed rulemaking to provide
guidance to states on the attainment planning requirements in subparts
1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act that apply to areas designated
nonattainment for PM2.5. In the interim, EPA encourages the
State to review the General Preamble and Addendum for guidance on how
to implement these statutory requirements in the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 (April 16,
1992) and Addendum, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Summary of Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Pursuant to section 188(b)(1) of the Act, EPA is proposing to
reclassify the SJV nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
standards based on EPA's determination that the area cannot practicably
attain these NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2015.
This proposed action is based upon EPA's evaluation of ambient air
quality data for the 2003-2014 period indicating that it is not
practicable for certain monitoring sites within the SJV to show
PM2.5 design values at or below the level of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS by April 5, 2015. Upon reclassification as a
Serious nonattainment area, California will be required to submit a
Serious area plan that satisfies the requirements of part D of title I
of the Act, including a demonstration that the plan provides for
attainment of the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards in
the SJV area by the applicable attainment date, which is
[[Page 1490]]
no later than December 31, 2015, or by the most expeditious alternative
date practicable and no later than December 31, 2020, consistent with
the requirements of CAA sections 189(b) and 188(e).
In addition, because EPA is proposing to similarly reclassify areas
of Indian country within the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area as
Serious nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 standards,
consistent with our proposed reclassification of the surrounding non-
Indian country lands, EPA has invited consultation with interested
tribes concerning this issue. We note that although eligible tribes may
seek EPA approval of relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of
the affected tribes will be required to submit an implementation plan
to address this reclassification.
EPA is requesting public comment on this proposed action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action under the terms
of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and Executive
Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), and therefore was not
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
Reclassification does not itself create any new requirements, and does
not impose a materially adverse impact under Executive Order 12866.
With respect to lands under state jurisdiction, this proposed
reclassification would trigger statutory deadlines for the state to
submit Serious area plan elements. With respect to Indian country,
reclassifications do not establish deadlines for air quality plans or
plan revisions because tribes are not subject to implementation plan
submittal deadlines that apply to states as a result of
reclassifications.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521)
because it does not contain any information collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612. This action will not impose
any requirements on small entities. The proposed rule would require the
state to adopt and submit SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory
requirements that apply to Serious areas, and would not itself directly
regulate any small entities. We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more and does not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2
U.S.C. 1531-1538). This action itself imposes no enforceable duty on
any state, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector. The
proposed action would reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, which would trigger
existing statutory timeframes for the state to submit SIP revisions.
Such a reclassification in and of itself does not impose any federal
intergovernmental mandate. The proposed action would not require any
tribes to submit implementation plans.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). The
requirement to submit SIP revisions to meet the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS is imposed by the CAA. This proposed rule does not alter the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and state and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed action
from state and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have Tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes.''
Eight Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the SJV
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big Sandy
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of
Mono Indians of California, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California,
the Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain
Rancheria of California, the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River
Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
EPA has concluded that this proposed rule might have tribal
implications for the purposes of Executive Order 13175, but that it
would not impose substantial direct compliance costs upon the tribes,
nor would it preempt tribal law. We note that none of the tribes
located in the SJV nonattainment area has requested eligibility to
administer programs under the Clean Air Act. The proposed rule would
affect EPA's implementation of the new source review program because of
the lower ``major source'' threshold triggered by reclassification (70
tons per year for direct PM2.5 and precursors to
PM2.5). The proposed rule may also affect new or modified
stationary sources proposed in these areas that require Federal
permits, approvals, or funding. Such projects are subject to the
requirements of EPA's General Conformity rule, and Federal permits,
approvals, or funding for the projects may be more difficult to obtain
because of the lower de minimis thresholds triggered by
reclassification.
Given these potential implications, EPA contacted tribal officials
during the process of developing this proposed rule to provide an
opportunity for the tribes to have meaningful and timely input into its
development. On September 30, 2014, we sent letters to leaders of the
[[Page 1491]]
seven tribes with areas of Indian country in the SJV nonattainment area
inviting government-to-government consultation on the rulemaking
effort. We requested that the tribal leaders, or their designated
consultation representatives, provide input or request government-to-
government consultation by October 27, 2014. We did not receive a
response from any of the tribes. As noted above, EPA inadvertently did
not send a letter to the Tejon Indian Tribe prior to this proposed
action. We recognize that the proposed reclassification may be of
interest to officials of the Tejon Indian Tribe and we are contacting
them presently to offer them an opportunity for government-to-
government consultation. We intend to continue communicating with all
eight tribes located within the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment
area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as we move forward developing
a final rule. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This
proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it
proposes only to reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, which would trigger
additional Serious area planning requirements under the CAA. This
proposed action does not establish an environmental standard intended
to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This action is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) because it does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This proposed action would only reclassify the SJV
nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, which would trigger additional Serious area
planning requirements under the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 18, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2015-00309 Filed 1-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
