Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; Sacramento Metro Area; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 4795-4799 [2015-01609]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by March 30, 2015.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See CAA
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart BB—Montana
2. Section 52.1370 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(74) to read as
follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
§ 52.1370
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(74) On June 4, 2013 the State of
Montana submitted revisions to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0178; FRL–9921–99–
Region 9]
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
California that provide for attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (‘‘standard’’ or
NAAQS) in the Sacramento Metro
nonattainment area. The EPA is
approving the emissions inventories, air
quality modeling, reasonably available
control measures, provisions for
transportation control strategies and
measures, rate of progress and
reasonable further progress (RFP)
demonstrations, attainment
demonstration, transportation
conformity motor vehicle emissions
budgets, and contingency measures for
failure to make RFP or attain. The EPA
is also approving commitments for
measures by the Sacramento Metro
nonattainment area air districts.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 2, 2015.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action: Docket ID No.
SUMMARY:
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Environmental Protection
Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as
follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
AGENCY:
Dated: November 3, 2014.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
■
[FR Doc. 2015–01490 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
California; Sacramento Metro Area;
Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Administrative Rules of Montana
(ARM), Air Quality, Subchapter 8,
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
of Air Quality, 17.8.801, Definitions, and
17.8.818, Review of Major Stationary
Sources and Major Modifications—
Source Applicability and Exemptions.
(i) Incorporation by reference
(A) Administrative Rules of Montana,
Air Quality, Subchapter 8, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of Air Quality,
17.8.801, Definitions, (20) introductory
text, (20)(a); (22) introductory text,
(22)(b); (25); (28) introductory text,
(28)(a), except for the phrase ‘‘nitrogen
oxides (NOx)’’; and, 17.8.818, Review of
Major Stationary Sources and Major
Modifications—Source Applicability
and Exemptions, (7) introductory text,
(7)(a) introductory text, (7)(a)(vi),
effective 10/12/2012.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4795
EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0178. Generally,
documents in the docket for this action
are available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office (AIR–2),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, (415) 972–3963,
ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Proposed Action
A. Regulatory Background
B. CARB’s Submittals
C. The EPA’s Proposed Approval
II. What comments did the EPA receive on
the proposed rule?
III. What action is the EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Proposed Action
On October 15, 2014 (79 FR 61799),
under section 110(k) of the Clean Air
Act (Act or CAA), the EPA proposed
approval of a series of submittals from
the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) as revisions to the California
state implementation plan (SIP) for the
Sacramento Metro ozone nonattainment
area (SMA).1 The principal submittals
are:
D Sacramento Regional
Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone
Reasonable Further Progress Plan 2002–
2008 (‘‘2002–2008 RFP Plan’’), February
2006;
D Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone
Attainment Plan and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan, March 26, 2009
1 The SMA consists of Sacramento and Yolo
counties and portions of El Dorado, Placer, Solano
and Sutter counties. For a precise description of the
geographic boundaries of the SMA, see 40 CFR
81.305. Sacramento County is under the jurisdiction
of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD). Yolo County and
the eastern portion of Solano County comprise the
Yolo-Solano AQMD (YSAQMD). The southern
portion of Sutter County is part of the Feather River
AQMD (FRAQMD). The western portion of Placer
County is part of the Placer County Air Pollution
Control District (PCAPCD). Lastly, the western
portion of El Dorado County is part of the El Dorado
County AQMD (EDCAQMD). Collectively, we refer
to these five districts as the ‘‘Districts.’’
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
4796
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(‘‘2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP
Plan’’ or ‘‘2009 Plan’’);
D Elements of CARB’s 2007 State
Strategy (‘‘2007 State Strategy’’),
adopted by CARB on September 27,
2007, as applicable in the SMA;
D Elements of the Status Report on the
State Strategy for California’s 2007 State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and
Proposed Revision to the SIP Reflecting
Implementation of the 2007 State
Strategy (‘‘Revised 2007 State
Strategy’’),2 March 24, 2009, as
applicable in the SMA; and
D Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone
Attainment Plan and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan, 2013 SIP
Revisions (‘‘2013 Ozone Attainment and
RFP Plan’’ or ‘‘2013 Plan Update’’),
September 26, 2013.
We refer to these submittals
collectively as the ‘‘Sacramento 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment Plan’’ or
‘‘Sacramento Ozone Plan.’’ The SMA is
classified as ‘‘severe-15’’ with an
attainment date no later than June 15,
2019.3 See 75 FR 24409. The following
paragraphs summarize the regulatory
background, CARB’s submittals, and the
EPA’s rationale for proposing approval.
For additional details concerning these
topics, please see our October 15, 2014
proposed rule.
A. Regulatory Background
The specific CAA requirement that is
relevant for the purposes of this action
is Title I, Part D of the CAA, under
which states must implement the 1997
8-hour ozone standard. Title I, Part D of
the CAA includes section 172,
‘‘Nonattainment plan provisions,’’ and
subpart 2, ‘‘Additional Provisions for
Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’ (sections
181–185).
In order to assist states in developing
effective plans to address their ozone
nonattainment problem, the EPA issued
the 8-hour ozone implementation rule.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2 On
July 21, 2011, CARB further revised the State
Strategy (i.e., Progress Report on Implementation of
PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the
South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and
Proposed SIP Revisions). Although the 2011
revision was specific to the South Coast and San
Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment areas, it
contained Appendix E, an assessment of the
impacts of the economic recession on emissions
from the goods movement sector. The growth
projections developed for emissions inventories in
the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment
Plan and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (2013
Revisions) also rely on the recessionary impacts in
Appendix E.
3 For the 2008 ozone standard, we also designated
the SMA as nonattainment and classified the area
as ‘‘severe-15.’’ See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
The SMA attainment date for the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard is as expeditious as practicable but no
later than December 31, 2027. Today’s action does
not address requirements concerning the 2008 8hour ozone standard.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
This rule was finalized in two phases.
The first phase of the rule addresses
classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, applicable attainment dates
for the various classifications, and the
timing of emissions reductions needed
for attainment. See 69 FR 23951 (April
30, 2004). The second phase addresses
SIP submittal dates and the
requirements for reasonably available
control technology and measures (RACT
and RACM), RFP, modeling and
attainment demonstrations, contingency
measures, and new source review. See
70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). The
rule is codified at 40 CFR part 51,
subpart X.4 We discussed each of these
CAA and regulatory requirements for 8hour ozone nonattainment plans in
more detail in our October 15, 2014
proposal.
B. CARB’s Submittals
The 2002–2008 RFP Plan was adopted
by the Districts’ governing boards
during the January–February 2006 time
frame and then by CARB Executive
Order G–125–335 on February 24, 2006.
The 2002–2008 RFP Plan includes an
RFP demonstration for the 2002–2008
period, an amended Rate of Progress
Plan for the 1990–1996 period, and
motor-vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB
or ‘‘budgets’’) used for transportation
conformity purposes.
The 2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP
Plan was adopted by the Districts’
governing boards during the January–
February 2009 time frame and then by
CARB on March 26, 2009. The 2009
Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan
includes an attainment demonstration,
commitments by the Districts to adopt
control measures to achieve emissions
reductions from sources under its
jurisdiction (primarily stationary
sources), and budgets used for
transportation conformity purposes. The
attainment demonstration includes air
quality modeling, an RFP plan, an
analysis of RACM/RACT, base year and
projected year emissions inventories,
and contingency measures. The 2009
Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan also
includes a demonstration that the most
expeditious date for attaining the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SMA is
June 15, 2018.
In late 2013, SMAQMD and CARB
adopted the 2013 Plan Update, which
4 The EPA has revised or proposed to revise
several elements of the 8-hour ozone
implementation rule since its initial promulgation
in 2004. See, e.g., 74 FR 2936 (January 16, 2009);
75 FR 51960 (August 24, 2010); and 75 FR 80420
(December 22, 2010). None of these revisions affect
any provision of the rule that is applicable to the
EPA’s proposed action on the Sacramento 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment Plan.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
revised portions of the 2009 Plan. The
2013 Plan Update included a revised
emissions inventory that accounted for
control measures adopted through 2011,
revised attainment and RFP
demonstrations, the effects of the
economic recession, and updated
transportation activity projections
provided by the Sacramento Area
Council of Governments (SACOG). On
June 19, 2014, CARB submitted a
technical supplement to the Sacramento
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
emissions offset demonstration in the
2013 Plan Update.5 CARB’s technical
supplement includes a revised set of
motor vehicle emissions estimates
reflecting technical changes to the
inputs used to develop the original set
of calculations.6 While the vehicle
emissions estimates in CARB’s technical
supplement differ from those contained
in the demonstration in the 2013 Plan
Update, the conclusions in the revised
analysis remain the same as those in the
2013 Plan Update.
To demonstrate attainment, the
Sacramento Ozone Plan relies to a large
extent on measures in CARB’s 2007
State Strategy. The 2007 State Strategy
was adopted by CARB on September 27,
2007 and submitted to the EPA on
November 16, 2007.7 The 2007 State
Strategy describes CARB’s overall
approach to addressing, in conjunction
with local plans, attainment of both the
1997 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) and
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS not only in
the SMA but also in California’s other
nonattainment areas, such as the South
Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin
Valley. It also includes CARB’s
commitments to obtain emissions
reductions of NOX and VOC from
sources under the State’s jurisdiction,
primarily on- and off-road motor
vehicles and engines, through the
5 See letter from Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive
Officer, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, EPA Region 9, June 19, 2014, with
enclosures. On July 25, 2014, CARB sent the EPA
a revised technical supplement that corrected minor
typographical errors. See record of July 25, 2014
email and attachment from Jon Taylor, CARB, to
Matt Lakin, EPA, included in the docket.
6 The principal difference between the two sets of
calculations is that CARB’s technical supplement
includes running exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak,
and running loss emissions of VOCs in all of the
emissions scenarios. These processes are directly
related to VMT and vehicle trips. The revised
calculation excludes diurnal and resting loss
emissions of VOCs from all of the emissions
scenarios because such evaporative emissions are
related to vehicle population rather than to VMT or
vehicle trips.
7 See CARB Resolution No. 07–28, September 27,
2007 with attachments and letter, James N.
Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, to Wayne
Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9,
November 16, 2007 with enclosures.
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
implementation of 15 defined State
measures.8
On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted
the Revised 2007 State Strategy, dated
March 24, 2009 and adopted April 24,
2009.9 10 This submittal updated the
2007 State Strategy to reflect its
implementation during 2007 and 2008
and calculated emission reductions in
the SMA from implementation of the
State Strategy. The 2013 Plan Update
incorporates the Revised 2007 State
Strategy and updates NOX and VOC
emissions reductions estimates from
adopted State measures and
commitments. In our proposal and in
the context of the Sacramento Ozone
Plan, we only evaluated the State
measures that are included in the
Revised 2007 State Strategy and
applicable in the SMA.
For additional background on the
submittals and CAA procedural and
administrative requirements for SIP
submittals, see the October 15, 2014
proposal.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. The EPA’s Proposed Approval
As noted above, on October 15, 2014,
the EPA proposed to approve
California’s attainment SIP for the SMA
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. This
SIP is comprised of a series of
submittals described above.
In its proposal, the EPA proposed to
approve under CAA section 110(k)(3)
the following elements of the
Sacramento Ozone Plan:
1. The revised 2002 base year
emissions inventory as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.915;
2. The reasonably available control
measure demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.912(d);
3. The rate of progress and reasonable
further progress demonstrations as
meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and
40 CFR 51.910 and 51.905;
4. The attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.908;
8 The 2007 State Strategy also includes measures
(i.e., Smog Check improvements) to be
implemented by the California Bureau of
Automotive Repair. See 2007 State Strategy, pp. 64–
65 and CARB Resolution 7–28, Attachment B, p. 8.
9 See CARB Resolution No. 09–34, April 24, 2009
and letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer,
CARB to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 9, August 12, 2009 with enclosures.
Only pages 11–27 of the Revised 2007 State Strategy
were submitted as a SIP revision. The balance of the
report was for informational purposes only. See
Attachment A to CARB Resolution No. 09–34.
10 The EPA has previously approved portions of
CARB’s 2007 State Strategy and the Revised 2007
State Strategy that are relevant for attainment of the
1997 8-hour ozone standard in the San Joaquin
Valley. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
5. The contingency measure
provisions for failure to make RFP and
to attain as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9);
6. The demonstration that the SIP
provides for transportation control
strategies and measures sufficient to
offset any growth in emissions from
growth in VMT or the number of vehicle
trips, and to provide for RFP and
attainment, as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A);
7. The revised motor vehicle
emissions budgets for 2017 and for the
attainment year of 2018 because they are
derived from approvable RFP and
attainment demonstrations and meet the
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and
40 CFR part 93, subpart A; 11 and
8. The Districts’ commitments to
adopt and implement certain defined
measures, as summarized in table 7–5
on page 7–32 of the 2013 Plan Update,
as strengthening the SIP.12
The EPA’s analysis and findings are
summarized in our October 15, 2014
proposal and are described in more
detail in the Technical Support
Document (TSD) for the proposal, which
is available online at
www.regulations.gov in the docket,
EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0178, or from the
EPA contact listed at the beginning of
this notice.
II. What comments did the EPA receive
on the proposed rule?
Our October 15, 2014 proposed rule
provided for a 30-day comment period.
During this period, we received a
comment letter jointly signed by Larry
Greene, Executive Director/Air
Pollution Control Officer at the
SMAQMD, and Mike McKeever, Chief
Executive Officer at SACOG. We
provide our response to the comment
letter below.
Comment: The SMAQMD notes that
the 2013 Plan Update contains NOX
reductions that exceed by 1.0 tons per
day (tpd) the amount of reductions of
NOX needed to meet the attainment
target for 2018. They refer to this excess
as a ‘‘buffer’’ intended for possible use,
if necessary, to demonstrate general
conformity for future federal projects. In
11 Motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for
2011, 2014, and 2017 were previously found
adequate by the EPA on July 28, 2009 (74 FR
37210). New MVEBs for 2014, 2017, and 2018 in
the 2013 Plan Update were determined to be
adequate on July 25, 2014. The adequacy finding
was published on August 8, 2014 (79 FR 46436)
with an effective date of August 25, 2014.
12 The October 15, 2014 proposal incorrectly
refers to table 7–2 on pages 7–5 and 7–6 of the 2013
Plan Update as the location of the Districts’
commitments to adopt and implement certain
defined measures. The correct cite is Table 7–5 on
page 7–32. The Districts’ measures are further
described in Section 7.5 of the 2013 Plan Update.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4797
its proposal, the EPA did not credit all
reductions in the 2013 Plan Update, and
the attainment demonstration adjusted
by the EPA results in excess NOX
reductions in 2018 of only 0.1 tpd. The
2018 motor vehicle emissions budget
(MVEB) in the 2013 Plan Update
includes a 2018 safety margin of 3.0 tpd
of NOX. In their comment letter,
SMAQMD requests that the EPA
reallocate 0.9 tpd of NOX from the 2018
MVEB safety margin to the ‘‘general
conformity NOX buffer.’’ This would
leave 2.1 tpd in the 2018 NOX safety
margin and 1.0 tpd of NOX (i.e., 0.9 tpd
from the safety margin plus 0.1 tpd
excess in the adjusted attainment
demonstration) available, if needed, for
general conformity.
Response: The SMAQMD is correct
that, in proposing approval of the
attainment demonstration, the EPA did
not credit all of the emissions
reductions claimed in the plan but
found that the plan nonetheless
provides sufficient, creditable,
emissions reductions to meet the
emissions targets necessary to attain the
ozone standard by 2018. The EPA,
however, did credit some of the local
measures included as ‘‘remaining
regional/local control measures’’ in line
J of table 8–1 in the 2013 Plan Update
for attainment demonstration purposes
because, by the time of our proposed
rule, certain individual rules had been
adopted, submitted, and approved by
the EPA (e.g., YSAQMD Rule 2.37). See
table 10 of the October 15, 2014
proposed rule.
The emissions reductions that EPA
discounted in its evaluation of the
attainment demonstration include those
associated with (1) local rules that,
while adopted, have not yet been
submitted or approved by the EPA but
for which credit is taken as part of the
emission inventory baseline for 2018
(see page 14 of the EPA’s TSD for the
October 15, 2014 proposed rule); (2)
certain mobile source incentive
programs for which credit is taken as
part of the emission inventory baseline
for 2018 (see page 14 of the TSD); (3)
local rules included as ‘‘remaining
regional/local control measures’’ (see
pages 7–27 through 7–31 of the 2013
Plan Update) included in line J in table
8–1 of the 2013 Plan Update that have
not been adopted or submitted to the
EPA for approval as part of the SIP; (4)
regional non-regulatory measures
(included in line J in table 8–1 of the
2013 Plan Update); and (5) the
‘‘Remaining State/Federal Control
Measures’’ (shown in line K in table 8–
1 of the 2013 Plan Update).
By the EPA’s accounting, as
SMAQMD contends, the ‘‘buffer’’ is
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
4798
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
only 0.1 tpd for NOX, not 1.0 tpd as
claimed in the plan. The calculated
‘‘buffer’’ itself reflects a 2018 MVEB
‘‘safety margin’’ of 3 tpd of NOX, and
therefore, there are surplus NOX
reductions that could be reallocated
from the MVEB ‘‘safety margin’’ to other
purposes, such as a set-aside for general
conformity. However, to effectuate such
a reallocation, the CARB and the
Districts should adopt and submit a
revised plan to EPA as a revision to the
SIP. The EPA contacted the SMAQMD
concerning this matter, and the
SMAQMD expressed support for
completion of the current rulemaking
even if the EPA cannot grant the request
to reallocate a portion of the NOX MVEB
at this time.13 Therefore, we are taking
final action today consistent with our
October 15, 2014 proposed rule and will
consider the reallocation of the MVEB
safety margin once a revised SIP is
submitted.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. What action is the EPA taking?
For the reasons discussed in our
October 15, 2014 proposal and
summarized above, the EPA is
approving California’s attainment SIP
for the Sacramento Metro Area for the
1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. This SIP is
comprised of the Sacramento Regional
Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone
Reasonable Further Progress Plan 2002–
2008 (February 2006), Sacramento
Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan
and Reasonable Further Progress Plan
(March 26, 2009), CARB’s 2007 State
Strategy (adopted by CARB on
September 27, 2007) and Revised 2007
State Strategy (March 24, 2009)
(specifically, the portions applicable to
the SMA), and the Sacramento Regional
8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and
Reasonable Further Progress Plan
(September 26, 2013).
Under section 110(k)(3), the EPA is
approving the following elements of the
Sacramento Ozone Plan:
1. The revised 2002 base year
emissions inventory as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.915;
2. The reasonably available control
measure demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.912(d);
3. The rate of progress and reasonable
further progress demonstrations as
meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and
40 CFR 51.910 and 51.905;
13 See email from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX, dated December 17, 2014,
summarizing a December 3rd telephone
conversation between herself and Larry Greene at
the SMAQMD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
4. The attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.908;
5. The contingency measure
provisions for failure to make RFP and
to attain as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9);
6. The demonstration that the SIP
provides for transportation control
strategies and measures sufficient to
offset any growth in emissions from
growth in VMT or the number of vehicle
trips, and to provide for RFP and
attainment, as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A);
7. The revised motor vehicle
emissions budgets for 2017 and for the
attainment year of 2018, because they
are derived from approvable RFP and
attainment demonstrations and meet the
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and
40 CFR part 93, subpart A;14 and
8. The Districts’ commitments to
adopt and implement certain defined
measures, as summarized in table 7–5
on page 7–32 of the 2013 Plan Update.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
The Administrator is required to
approve a SIP submission that complies
with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state plan
revisions as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For these reasons,
this final action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
14 The MVEBs approved in today’s action are the
following (in tons per day, average summer
weekday): 18 tpd and 39 tpd of VOC and NOX for
2017, respectively, and 17 tpd and 37 tpd of VOC
and NOX, respectively, for 2018.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by March 30, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 19 / Thursday, January 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
(1) Sacramento Regional 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan (2013 SIP
Revisions), September 26, 2013,
including appendices.
(2) Supplemental information, titled
‘‘Sacramento Federal Ozone
Nonattainment Area, July 24, 2014,’’ for
Appendix F–1 (‘‘Vehicle Miles Traveled
Offset Demonstration’’) of the
Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone
Attainment and Reasonable Further
Progress Plan (2013 SIP Revisions).
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental
regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 9, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
[FR Doc. 2015–01609 Filed 1–28–15; 8:45 am]
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0725, FRL–9922–04–
Region 8]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
40 CFR Part 52
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to view the hard copy
of the docket. You may view the hard
copy of the docket Monday through
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abby Fulton, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, 303–312–6563,
fulton.abby@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(450), (c)(451) and
(c)(452) to read as read as follows:
Promulgation of State Implementation
Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5, 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, and
2010 NO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards; South Dakota
Table of Contents
§ 52.220
AGENCY:
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
I. Background
Subpart F—California
■
Identification of plan.
*
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
4799
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(450) The following plan was
submitted on February 24, 2006 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 EightHour Ozone Planning Area.
(1) Sacramento Regional
Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone
Rate-of-Progress Plan, Final Draft,
December 2005.
(451) The following plan was
submitted on April 17, 2009 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 EightHour Ozone Planning Area.
(1) Sacramento Regional 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan (With Errata
Sheets Incorporated), March 26, 2009
(Reasonable further progress
demonstration and related contingency
demonstration for milestone year 2011
as presented in chapter 13 (‘‘Reasonable
Further Progress Demonstrations’’)
only).
(452) The following plan was
submitted on December 31, 2013 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 EightHour Ozone Planning Area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:12 Jan 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving elements of
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions from the State of South Dakota
to demonstrate the State meets
infrastructure requirements of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
promulgated for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) on July 18, 1997 and October 17,
2006; lead (Pb) on October 15, 2008;
ozone on March 12, 2008; and nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010. EPA
is also approving SIP revisions the State
submitted updating the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program
and provisions regarding state boards.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that
each state submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by EPA.
DATES: This rule is effective on March 2,
2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0725. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Infrastructure requirements for SIPs
are provided in section 110(a)(1) and (2)
of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) lists the
specific infrastructure elements that a
SIP must contain or satisfy. The
elements that are the subject of this
action are described in detail in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR)
published on December 1, 2014 (79 FR
71040).
The NPR proposed approval of South
Dakota’s submissions with respect to the
following infrastructure elements for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008
ozone, and 2010 NO2 NAAQS: CAA
110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C) with respect to
minor new source review (NSR) and
PSD requirements, (D)(i)(II) prongs 3
and 4, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K),
(L), and (M). The reasons for our
approval are provided in detail in the
NPR.
For reasons explained in the NPR,
EPA also proposed to approve revisions
to the Administrative Rules of South
Dakota (ARSD) 74:36:09 submitted on
July 29, 2013, which incorporate by
reference the requirements of EPA’s
September 29, 2010 PM2.5 Increment
Rule. Specifically, we proposed to
approve the adoption of the text of 40
CFR 52.21, paragraphs (b)(14)(i),(ii),(iii),
(b)(15)(i),(ii), and paragraph (c) as they
existed on July 1, 2012 by approving
revisions to: ARSD 74:34:09:02
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 19 (Thursday, January 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4795-4799]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01609]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0178; FRL-9921-99-Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; Sacramento Metro Area; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standard
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted
by the State of California that provide for attainment of the 1997 8-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (``standard'' or
NAAQS) in the Sacramento Metro nonattainment area. The EPA is approving
the emissions inventories, air quality modeling, reasonably available
control measures, provisions for transportation control strategies and
measures, rate of progress and reasonable further progress (RFP)
demonstrations, attainment demonstration, transportation conformity
motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures for failure
to make RFP or attain. The EPA is also approving commitments for
measures by the Sacramento Metro nonattainment area air districts.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 2, 2015.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action: Docket ID
No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0178. Generally, documents in the docket for this
action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-
3963, ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Proposed Action
A. Regulatory Background
B. CARB's Submittals
C. The EPA's Proposed Approval
II. What comments did the EPA receive on the proposed rule?
III. What action is the EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Proposed Action
On October 15, 2014 (79 FR 61799), under section 110(k) of the
Clean Air Act (Act or CAA), the EPA proposed approval of a series of
submittals from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as revisions
to the California state implementation plan (SIP) for the Sacramento
Metro ozone nonattainment area (SMA).\1\ The principal submittals are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The SMA consists of Sacramento and Yolo counties and
portions of El Dorado, Placer, Solano and Sutter counties. For a
precise description of the geographic boundaries of the SMA, see 40
CFR 81.305. Sacramento County is under the jurisdiction of the
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD).
Yolo County and the eastern portion of Solano County comprise the
Yolo-Solano AQMD (YSAQMD). The southern portion of Sutter County is
part of the Feather River AQMD (FRAQMD). The western portion of
Placer County is part of the Placer County Air Pollution Control
District (PCAPCD). Lastly, the western portion of El Dorado County
is part of the El Dorado County AQMD (EDCAQMD). Collectively, we
refer to these five districts as the ``Districts.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ssquf] Sacramento Regional Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone
Reasonable Further Progress Plan 2002-2008 (``2002-2008 RFP Plan''),
February 2006;
[ssquf] Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and
Reasonable Further Progress Plan, March 26, 2009
[[Page 4796]]
(``2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan'' or ``2009 Plan'');
[ssquf] Elements of CARB's 2007 State Strategy (``2007 State
Strategy''), adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007, as applicable in
the SMA;
[ssquf] Elements of the Status Report on the State Strategy for
California's 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP) and Proposed Revision
to the SIP Reflecting Implementation of the 2007 State Strategy
(``Revised 2007 State Strategy''),\2\ March 24, 2009, as applicable in
the SMA; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On July 21, 2011, CARB further revised the State Strategy
(i.e., Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State
Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South Coast and San Joaquin
Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions). Although the 2011
revision was specific to the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley
ozone nonattainment areas, it contained Appendix E, an assessment of
the impacts of the economic recession on emissions from the goods
movement sector. The growth projections developed for emissions
inventories in the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan
and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (2013 Revisions) also rely on
the recessionary impacts in Appendix E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ssquf] Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and
Reasonable Further Progress Plan, 2013 SIP Revisions (``2013 Ozone
Attainment and RFP Plan'' or ``2013 Plan Update''), September 26, 2013.
We refer to these submittals collectively as the ``Sacramento 8-
Hour Ozone Attainment Plan'' or ``Sacramento Ozone Plan.'' The SMA is
classified as ``severe-15'' with an attainment date no later than June
15, 2019.\3\ See 75 FR 24409. The following paragraphs summarize the
regulatory background, CARB's submittals, and the EPA's rationale for
proposing approval. For additional details concerning these topics,
please see our October 15, 2014 proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the 2008 ozone standard, we also designated the SMA as
nonattainment and classified the area as ``severe-15.'' See 77 FR
30088 (May 21, 2012). The SMA attainment date for the 2008 8-hour
ozone standard is as expeditious as practicable but no later than
December 31, 2027. Today's action does not address requirements
concerning the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Regulatory Background
The specific CAA requirement that is relevant for the purposes of
this action is Title I, Part D of the CAA, under which states must
implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Title I, Part D of the CAA
includes section 172, ``Nonattainment plan provisions,'' and subpart 2,
``Additional Provisions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' (sections 181-
185).
In order to assist states in developing effective plans to address
their ozone nonattainment problem, the EPA issued the 8-hour ozone
implementation rule. This rule was finalized in two phases. The first
phase of the rule addresses classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, applicable attainment dates for the various classifications,
and the timing of emissions reductions needed for attainment. See 69 FR
23951 (April 30, 2004). The second phase addresses SIP submittal dates
and the requirements for reasonably available control technology and
measures (RACT and RACM), RFP, modeling and attainment demonstrations,
contingency measures, and new source review. See 70 FR 71612 (November
29, 2005). The rule is codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart X.\4\ We
discussed each of these CAA and regulatory requirements for 8-hour
ozone nonattainment plans in more detail in our October 15, 2014
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The EPA has revised or proposed to revise several elements
of the 8-hour ozone implementation rule since its initial
promulgation in 2004. See, e.g., 74 FR 2936 (January 16, 2009); 75
FR 51960 (August 24, 2010); and 75 FR 80420 (December 22, 2010).
None of these revisions affect any provision of the rule that is
applicable to the EPA's proposed action on the Sacramento 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. CARB's Submittals
The 2002-2008 RFP Plan was adopted by the Districts' governing
boards during the January-February 2006 time frame and then by CARB
Executive Order G-125-335 on February 24, 2006. The 2002-2008 RFP Plan
includes an RFP demonstration for the 2002-2008 period, an amended Rate
of Progress Plan for the 1990-1996 period, and motor-vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEB or ``budgets'') used for transportation conformity
purposes.
The 2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan was adopted by the
Districts' governing boards during the January-February 2009 time frame
and then by CARB on March 26, 2009. The 2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP
Plan includes an attainment demonstration, commitments by the Districts
to adopt control measures to achieve emissions reductions from sources
under its jurisdiction (primarily stationary sources), and budgets used
for transportation conformity purposes. The attainment demonstration
includes air quality modeling, an RFP plan, an analysis of RACM/RACT,
base year and projected year emissions inventories, and contingency
measures. The 2009 Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan also includes a
demonstration that the most expeditious date for attaining the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in the SMA is June 15, 2018.
In late 2013, SMAQMD and CARB adopted the 2013 Plan Update, which
revised portions of the 2009 Plan. The 2013 Plan Update included a
revised emissions inventory that accounted for control measures adopted
through 2011, revised attainment and RFP demonstrations, the effects of
the economic recession, and updated transportation activity projections
provided by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). On June
19, 2014, CARB submitted a technical supplement to the Sacramento
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) emissions offset demonstration in the 2013
Plan Update.\5\ CARB's technical supplement includes a revised set of
motor vehicle emissions estimates reflecting technical changes to the
inputs used to develop the original set of calculations.\6\ While the
vehicle emissions estimates in CARB's technical supplement differ from
those contained in the demonstration in the 2013 Plan Update, the
conclusions in the revised analysis remain the same as those in the
2013 Plan Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See letter from Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, CARB,
to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, EPA Region 9, June 19,
2014, with enclosures. On July 25, 2014, CARB sent the EPA a revised
technical supplement that corrected minor typographical errors. See
record of July 25, 2014 email and attachment from Jon Taylor, CARB,
to Matt Lakin, EPA, included in the docket.
\6\ The principal difference between the two sets of
calculations is that CARB's technical supplement includes running
exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak, and running loss emissions of VOCs
in all of the emissions scenarios. These processes are directly
related to VMT and vehicle trips. The revised calculation excludes
diurnal and resting loss emissions of VOCs from all of the emissions
scenarios because such evaporative emissions are related to vehicle
population rather than to VMT or vehicle trips.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To demonstrate attainment, the Sacramento Ozone Plan relies to a
large extent on measures in CARB's 2007 State Strategy. The 2007 State
Strategy was adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007 and submitted to the
EPA on November 16, 2007.\7\ The 2007 State Strategy describes CARB's
overall approach to addressing, in conjunction with local plans,
attainment of both the 1997 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS not only in the SMA but also in
California's other nonattainment areas, such as the South Coast Air
Basin and the San Joaquin Valley. It also includes CARB's commitments
to obtain emissions reductions of NOX and VOC from sources
under the State's jurisdiction, primarily on- and off-road motor
vehicles and engines, through the
[[Page 4797]]
implementation of 15 defined State measures.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See CARB Resolution No. 07-28, September 27, 2007 with
attachments and letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 16,
2007 with enclosures.
\8\ The 2007 State Strategy also includes measures (i.e., Smog
Check improvements) to be implemented by the California Bureau of
Automotive Repair. See 2007 State Strategy, pp. 64-65 and CARB
Resolution 7-28, Attachment B, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted the Revised 2007 State Strategy,
dated March 24, 2009 and adopted April 24, 2009.9 10 This
submittal updated the 2007 State Strategy to reflect its implementation
during 2007 and 2008 and calculated emission reductions in the SMA from
implementation of the State Strategy. The 2013 Plan Update incorporates
the Revised 2007 State Strategy and updates NOX and VOC
emissions reductions estimates from adopted State measures and
commitments. In our proposal and in the context of the Sacramento Ozone
Plan, we only evaluated the State measures that are included in the
Revised 2007 State Strategy and applicable in the SMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See CARB Resolution No. 09-34, April 24, 2009 and letter,
James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB to Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, August 12, 2009 with
enclosures. Only pages 11-27 of the Revised 2007 State Strategy were
submitted as a SIP revision. The balance of the report was for
informational purposes only. See Attachment A to CARB Resolution No.
09-34.
\10\ The EPA has previously approved portions of CARB's 2007
State Strategy and the Revised 2007 State Strategy that are relevant
for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard in the San Joaquin
Valley. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For additional background on the submittals and CAA procedural and
administrative requirements for SIP submittals, see the October 15,
2014 proposal.
C. The EPA's Proposed Approval
As noted above, on October 15, 2014, the EPA proposed to approve
California's attainment SIP for the SMA for the 1997 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS. This SIP is comprised of a series of submittals described above.
In its proposal, the EPA proposed to approve under CAA section
110(k)(3) the following elements of the Sacramento Ozone Plan:
1. The revised 2002 base year emissions inventory as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.915;
2. The reasonably available control measure demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.912(d);
3. The rate of progress and reasonable further progress
demonstrations as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2)
and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR 51.910 and 51.905;
4. The attainment demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.908;
5. The contingency measure provisions for failure to make RFP and
to attain as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9);
6. The demonstration that the SIP provides for transportation
control strategies and measures sufficient to offset any growth in
emissions from growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips, and to
provide for RFP and attainment, as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A);
7. The revised motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and for the
attainment year of 2018 because they are derived from approvable RFP
and attainment demonstrations and meet the requirements of CAA section
176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A; \11\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for 2011, 2014, and
2017 were previously found adequate by the EPA on July 28, 2009 (74
FR 37210). New MVEBs for 2014, 2017, and 2018 in the 2013 Plan
Update were determined to be adequate on July 25, 2014. The adequacy
finding was published on August 8, 2014 (79 FR 46436) with an
effective date of August 25, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The Districts' commitments to adopt and implement certain
defined measures, as summarized in table 7-5 on page 7-32 of the 2013
Plan Update, as strengthening the SIP.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The October 15, 2014 proposal incorrectly refers to table
7-2 on pages 7-5 and 7-6 of the 2013 Plan Update as the location of
the Districts' commitments to adopt and implement certain defined
measures. The correct cite is Table 7-5 on page 7-32. The Districts'
measures are further described in Section 7.5 of the 2013 Plan
Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's analysis and findings are summarized in our October 15,
2014 proposal and are described in more detail in the Technical Support
Document (TSD) for the proposal, which is available online at
www.regulations.gov in the docket, EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0178, or from the
EPA contact listed at the beginning of this notice.
II. What comments did the EPA receive on the proposed rule?
Our October 15, 2014 proposed rule provided for a 30-day comment
period. During this period, we received a comment letter jointly signed
by Larry Greene, Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer at
the SMAQMD, and Mike McKeever, Chief Executive Officer at SACOG. We
provide our response to the comment letter below.
Comment: The SMAQMD notes that the 2013 Plan Update contains
NOX reductions that exceed by 1.0 tons per day (tpd) the
amount of reductions of NOX needed to meet the attainment
target for 2018. They refer to this excess as a ``buffer'' intended for
possible use, if necessary, to demonstrate general conformity for
future federal projects. In its proposal, the EPA did not credit all
reductions in the 2013 Plan Update, and the attainment demonstration
adjusted by the EPA results in excess NOX reductions in 2018
of only 0.1 tpd. The 2018 motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) in the
2013 Plan Update includes a 2018 safety margin of 3.0 tpd of
NOX. In their comment letter, SMAQMD requests that the EPA
reallocate 0.9 tpd of NOX from the 2018 MVEB safety margin
to the ``general conformity NOX buffer.'' This would leave
2.1 tpd in the 2018 NOX safety margin and 1.0 tpd of
NOX (i.e., 0.9 tpd from the safety margin plus 0.1 tpd
excess in the adjusted attainment demonstration) available, if needed,
for general conformity.
Response: The SMAQMD is correct that, in proposing approval of the
attainment demonstration, the EPA did not credit all of the emissions
reductions claimed in the plan but found that the plan nonetheless
provides sufficient, creditable, emissions reductions to meet the
emissions targets necessary to attain the ozone standard by 2018. The
EPA, however, did credit some of the local measures included as
``remaining regional/local control measures'' in line J of table 8-1 in
the 2013 Plan Update for attainment demonstration purposes because, by
the time of our proposed rule, certain individual rules had been
adopted, submitted, and approved by the EPA (e.g., YSAQMD Rule 2.37).
See table 10 of the October 15, 2014 proposed rule.
The emissions reductions that EPA discounted in its evaluation of
the attainment demonstration include those associated with (1) local
rules that, while adopted, have not yet been submitted or approved by
the EPA but for which credit is taken as part of the emission inventory
baseline for 2018 (see page 14 of the EPA's TSD for the October 15,
2014 proposed rule); (2) certain mobile source incentive programs for
which credit is taken as part of the emission inventory baseline for
2018 (see page 14 of the TSD); (3) local rules included as ``remaining
regional/local control measures'' (see pages 7-27 through 7-31 of the
2013 Plan Update) included in line J in table 8-1 of the 2013 Plan
Update that have not been adopted or submitted to the EPA for approval
as part of the SIP; (4) regional non-regulatory measures (included in
line J in table 8-1 of the 2013 Plan Update); and (5) the ``Remaining
State/Federal Control Measures'' (shown in line K in table 8-1 of the
2013 Plan Update).
By the EPA's accounting, as SMAQMD contends, the ``buffer'' is
[[Page 4798]]
only 0.1 tpd for NOX, not 1.0 tpd as claimed in the plan.
The calculated ``buffer'' itself reflects a 2018 MVEB ``safety margin''
of 3 tpd of NOX, and therefore, there are surplus
NOX reductions that could be reallocated from the MVEB
``safety margin'' to other purposes, such as a set-aside for general
conformity. However, to effectuate such a reallocation, the CARB and
the Districts should adopt and submit a revised plan to EPA as a
revision to the SIP. The EPA contacted the SMAQMD concerning this
matter, and the SMAQMD expressed support for completion of the current
rulemaking even if the EPA cannot grant the request to reallocate a
portion of the NOX MVEB at this time.\13\ Therefore, we are
taking final action today consistent with our October 15, 2014 proposed
rule and will consider the reallocation of the MVEB safety margin once
a revised SIP is submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See email from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, EPA
Region IX, dated December 17, 2014, summarizing a December 3rd
telephone conversation between herself and Larry Greene at the
SMAQMD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What action is the EPA taking?
For the reasons discussed in our October 15, 2014 proposal and
summarized above, the EPA is approving California's attainment SIP for
the Sacramento Metro Area for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. This SIP is
comprised of the Sacramento Regional Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone
Reasonable Further Progress Plan 2002-2008 (February 2006), Sacramento
Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and Reasonable Further Progress
Plan (March 26, 2009), CARB's 2007 State Strategy (adopted by CARB on
September 27, 2007) and Revised 2007 State Strategy (March 24, 2009)
(specifically, the portions applicable to the SMA), and the Sacramento
Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and Reasonable Further Progress
Plan (September 26, 2013).
Under section 110(k)(3), the EPA is approving the following
elements of the Sacramento Ozone Plan:
1. The revised 2002 base year emissions inventory as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.915;
2. The reasonably available control measure demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.912(d);
3. The rate of progress and reasonable further progress
demonstrations as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2)
and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR 51.910 and 51.905;
4. The attainment demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.908;
5. The contingency measure provisions for failure to make RFP and
to attain as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9);
6. The demonstration that the SIP provides for transportation
control strategies and measures sufficient to offset any growth in
emissions from growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips, and to
provide for RFP and attainment, as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A);
7. The revised motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and for the
attainment year of 2018, because they are derived from approvable RFP
and attainment demonstrations and meet the requirements of CAA section
176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A;\14\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The MVEBs approved in today's action are the following (in
tons per day, average summer weekday): 18 tpd and 39 tpd of VOC and
NOX for 2017, respectively, and 17 tpd and 37 tpd of VOC
and NOX, respectively, for 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The Districts' commitments to adopt and implement certain
defined measures, as summarized in table 7-5 on page 7-32 of the 2013
Plan Update.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
The Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that
complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly,
this action merely approves state plan revisions as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For these reasons, this final action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor
will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 30, 2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).
[[Page 4799]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 9, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(450), (c)(451)
and (c)(452) to read as read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(450) The following plan was submitted on February 24, 2006 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Planning Area.
(1) Sacramento Regional Nonattainment Area 8-Hour Ozone Rate-of-
Progress Plan, Final Draft, December 2005.
(451) The following plan was submitted on April 17, 2009 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Planning Area.
(1) Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan (With Errata Sheets Incorporated), March 26, 2009
(Reasonable further progress demonstration and related contingency
demonstration for milestone year 2011 as presented in chapter 13
(``Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations'') only).
(452) The following plan was submitted on December 31, 2013 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Sacramento Metro 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Planning Area.
(1) Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable
Further Progress Plan (2013 SIP Revisions), September 26, 2013,
including appendices.
(2) Supplemental information, titled ``Sacramento Federal Ozone
Nonattainment Area, July 24, 2014,'' for Appendix F-1 (``Vehicle Miles
Traveled Offset Demonstration'') of the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour
Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (2013 SIP
Revisions).
[FR Doc. 2015-01609 Filed 1-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
