Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; Coachella Valley; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards, 75764-75780 [2016-26376]
Download as PDF
75764
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska to the extent that it justifies
making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2014–16–10, Amendment 39–17934 (79
FR 48961, August 19, 2014), and adding
the following new AD:
■
Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2012–
1327; Directorate Identifier 2012–NE–
47–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by December
16, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD supersedes AD 2014–16–10,
Amendment 39–17934 (79 FR 48961, August
19, 2014).
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
RB211 Trent 768–60, 772–60, and 772B–60
turbofan engines, with low-pressure (LP)
compressor blade, part number (P/N)
FK23411, FK25441, FK25968, FW11901,
FW15393, FW23643, FW23741, FW23744,
KH23403, or KH23404, installed.
(d) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by LP compressor
blade partial airfoil release events. We are
issuing this AD to prevent LP compressor
blade airfoil separations, damage to the
engine, and damage to the airplane.
(e) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
(1) Ultrasonic Inspection (UI) of LP
Compressor Blade
(i) After the effective date of this AD, for
LP compressor blades that have accumulated
less than 1,800 cycles since new (CSN) or
cycles since last inspection (CSLI), perform a
UI of each LP compressor blade before the
blade exceeds 2,400 CSN or CSLI. Repeat the
UI of the blade before exceeding 2,400 CSLI.
(ii) For any LP compressor blade that
exceeds 1,800 CSN on the effective date of
this AD, inspect the blade before exceeding
600 flight cycles after the effective date of
this AD or before exceeding 3,600 CSN,
whichever occurs first. Thereafter, perform
the repetitive inspections before exceeding
2,400 CSLI.
(iii) For any blade that exceeds 2,200 CSLI
on September 23, 2014 (the effective date of
AD 2014–16–10), inspect the blade before
exceeding 3,000 CSLI or before further flight,
whichever occurs later. Thereafter, perform
the repetitive inspections before exceeding
2,400 CSLI.
(iv) Use paragraph 3, excluding
subparagraphs 3.C.(2)(b), 3.D.(2) and 3.G, of
RR Alert Non-Modification Service Bulletin
(NMSB) RB.211–72–AH465, Revision 2,
dated May 11, 2016, to perform the
inspections required by this AD.
(2) Use of Replacement Blades
(i) After the effective date of this AD, LP
compressor blade, P/N FK23411, FK25441,
FK25968, FW11901, FW15393, FW23643,
FW23741, FW23744, KH23403, or KH23404,
that has accumulated at least 2,400 CSN or
CSLI is eligible for installation if the blade
has passed the UI required by this AD.
(ii) Reserved.
obtained from RR, using the contact
information in paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.
(4) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box
31, Derby DE24 8BJ, UK; phone: 44 0 1332
242424; fax: 44 0 1332 249936.
(5) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
(f) Credit for Previous Actions
You may take credit for the UI required by
paragraph (e) of this AD, if you performed the
UI before the effective date of this AD using
RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–G702, dated May
23, 2011; or RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–G872,
Revision 2, dated March 8, 2013, or earlier
revisions; or RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–H311,
dated March 8, 2013; or the Engine Manual
E-Trent-1RR, Task 72–31–11–200–806.
SUMMARY:
(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office,
may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make
your request. You may email your request to:
ANE–AD–AMOC@faa.gov.
(h) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238–
7754; fax: 781–238–7199; email:
robert.green@faa.gov.
(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency AD 2016–0141, dated July 20,
2016, for more information. You may
examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating it in Docket No.
FAA–2012–1327.
(3) RR Alert NMSB RB.211–72–AH465,
Revision 2, dated May 11, 2016, can be
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
October 26, 2016.
Colleen M. D’Alessandro,
Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–26334 Filed 10–31–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0244; FRL–9954–76–
Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
California; Coachella Valley;
Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
California to provide for attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standards in the Coachella
Valley nonattainment area. The EPA is
proposing to find the emissions
inventories to be acceptable and to
approve the reasonably available control
measures, transportation control
strategies and measures, rate of progress
and reasonable further progress
demonstrations, attainment
demonstration, vehicle miles traveled
offset demonstration and the
transportation conformity motor vehicle
emission budgets.
DATES: Any comments must be
submitted by December 1, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2016–0244 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, the EPA may publish any
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically on
the www.regulations.gov Web site and
in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some
may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
below.
Tom
Kelly, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, (415) 972–3856,
kelly.thomasp@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Table of Contents
I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the
Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for
Ozone Nonattainment SIPs
III. CARB’s SIP Submittals to Address the
1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in the
Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
A. CARB’s SIP Submittals
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures
Demonstration and Adopted Control
Strategy
C. Attainment Demonstration
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further
Progress Demonstrations
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions
Offset Demonstration
V. The EPA’s Proposed Actions
A. The EPA’s Proposed Approvals
B. Request for Public Comments
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the
Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
Ground-level ozone is formed when
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight.1 These two
pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of
pollution sources, including on- and offroad motor vehicles and engines, power
plants and industrial facilities, and
smaller area sources such as lawn and
garden equipment and paints.
Scientific evidence indicates that
adverse public health effects occur
following exposure to ozone,
particularly in children and adults with
lung disease. Breathing air containing
ozone can reduce lung function and
inflame airways, which can increase
respiratory symptoms and aggravate
asthma or other lung diseases. Ozone
exposure also has been associated with
increased susceptibility to respiratory
infections, medication use, doctor visits,
as well as emergency department visits
and hospital admissions for individuals
with lung disease. Ozone exposure also
increases the risk of premature death
from heart or lung disease. Children are
at increased risk from exposure to ozone
because their lungs are still developing
and they are more likely to be active
outdoors, which increases their
exposure. See ‘‘Fact Sheet, Proposal to
Revise the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone’’ (January
6, 2010); 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010).
In 1979, under section 109 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA
established primary and secondary
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS or standards) for ozone at 0.12
parts per million (ppm) averaged over a
1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202 (February
8, 1979).
On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the
primary and secondary standards for
1 California plans use the term Reactive Organic
Gases (ROG) for VOC. These terms are essentially
synonymous. For simplicity, we use the term VOC
herein to mean either VOC or ROG.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75765
ozone to set the acceptable level of
ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm,
averaged over an 8-hour period (‘‘1997
8-hour ozone standards’’). See 62 FR
38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA set the
1997 8-hour ozone standard based on
scientific evidence demonstrating that
ozone causes adverse health effects at
lower concentrations and over longer
periods of time than was understood
when the previous 1-hour ozone
standards were set. The EPA determined
that the 1997 8-hour standards would be
more protective of human health,
especially for children and adults who
are active outdoors, and individuals
with a pre-existing respiratory disease,
such as asthma.2 In 2008, the EPA
revised and strengthened the NAAQS
for ozone by setting the acceptable level
of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075
ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period. 73
FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). In 2015, the
EPA further tightened the 8-hour ozone
standards to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015). While the 1979 1hour ozone standards and the 1997 8hour ozone standards have been
revoked, certain requirements that had
applied under the revoked standards
continue to apply under the antibacksliding provisions of CAA section
172(e), including an approved
attainment plan.
B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
the CAA to designate areas throughout
the nation as attaining or not attaining
the standards. Effective June 15, 2004,
we designated nonattainment areas for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. See 69
FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). The
designations and classifications for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards for
California areas are codified at 40 CFR
81.305. In a rule governing certain facets
of implementation of the 8-hour ozone
2 On March 27, 2008, the EPA revised and further
strengthened the primary and secondary NAAQS
for ozone by setting the acceptable level of ozone
in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an
8-hour period (‘‘2008 8-hour ozone standards’’). See
73 FR 16436. On May 21, 2012, the EPA designated
areas of the country with respect to the 2008 8-hour
ozone standards. See 77 FR 30088 and 40 CFR
81.330. On October 1, 2015, the EPA again
strengthened the primary and secondary NAAQS
for ozone in ambient air to 0.070 ppm averaged over
8 hours. See 80 FR 65292. For nonattainment areas
classified as ‘‘serious’’ under the 2008 ozone
standards, such as the Coachella Valley, attainment
SIPs were due on July 21, 2016. We will evaluate
the 2008 attainment SIPs in the timeframes
specified by the CAA. We have not yet set SIP
submittal dates for the 2015 8-hour ozone
standards. Today’s action applies only to the 1997
8-hour ozone standards and does not address
requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone
standards.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75766
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
standards (the Phase 1 Rule), the EPA
classified the Coachella Valley as
‘‘Serious’’ for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards, with an attainment date no
later than June 15, 2013. See 69 FR
23858 (April 30, 2004). On November
28, 2007, the California Air Resources
Board (CARB or State) requested that
the EPA reclassify the Coachella Valley
8-hour ozone nonattainment area from
‘‘Serious’’ to ‘‘Severe-15.’’ The EPA
granted the reclassification, effective
June 4, 2010, with an attainment date of
not later than June 15, 2019. See 75 FR
24409 (May 5, 2010).
The Coachella Valley area is located
within Riverside County. For a precise
description of the geographic
boundaries of the area, see 40 CFR
81.305. The Coachella Valley is under
the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD
or District). The District and CARB are
responsible for adopting and submitting
a state implementation plan (SIP) to
attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
for nonattainment areas in their
jurisdiction.
Air quality in the Coachella Valley
has steadily improved in recent years.
Design values have declined from 0.108
ppm in 2003 to 0.088 ppm in 2015.3
Design values are used to designate and
classify nonattainment areas, as well as
to assess progress towards meeting the
air quality standards.4
The Coachella Valley is downwind
from the South Coast Air Basin, which
is also regulated by the SCAQMD. The
South Coast Air Basin’s continued
progress toward meeting the 1997
Ozone standards is critical to the
Coachella Valley attaining the 1997
ozone standards. The SCAQMD’s Final
2007 Air Quality Management Plan
(2007 AQMP) states, ‘‘pollutant
transport from the South Coast Air
Basin to the Coachella Valley is the
primary cause of its ozone
nonattainment status.’’ 5 The 2007
AQMP cites several studies that confirm
the transport between the two air
basins.6 It also describes the late daily
3 Design values for 2000 to 2006 are contained in
Figure 8–5 of the 2007 AQMP. Design values for
2005 to 2015 are contained in the Air Quality
Subsystem (AQS) Preliminary Design Value Report
for the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert
(September 7, 2016). These documents are in the
docket for today’s action.
4 For more information about ozone design
values, see 40 CFR 50, Appendix I.
5 ‘‘Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,’’
South Coast Air Quality Management District, June
2007, see page 8–1.
6 2007 AQMP at 8–4 (citing R.W. Keith
(SCAQMD) A Climatological/Air Quality Profile,
California South Coast Air Basin, 1980; E.K. Kauper
(Pollution Res. & Control Corp.), Coachella Valley
Air Quality Study, Final Report, (County Contract
& U.S. Public Health Service Grant No. 69–A–0610),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
peak in ozone concentrations, 6:00 p.m.
for Palm Springs, as indicative of
pollution that has been transported. The
2007 AQMP states, ‘‘if this peak [in
ozone concentrations] were locally
generated, it would be occurring near
mid-day and not in the late afternoon or
early evening.’’ 7 The 2007 AQMP also
compares the relative magnitudes of
VOC and NOX emissions in the
Coachella Valley and the South Coast
Air Basin, showing average annual VOC
emissions to be 30–40 times greater in
the South Coast Air Basin than in the
Coachella Valley, and average annual
NOX emissions to be more than 20 times
greater in the South Coast Air Basin.8
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements
for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs
States must implement the 1997 8hour ozone standards under Title 1, Part
D of the CAA, which 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 ozone
nonattainment problems, the EPA
issued an implementation rule for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards (‘‘1997
Ozone Implementation Rule’’). This rule
was finalized in two phases. The first
phase of the rule addressed
classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards, 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 addressed
SIP submittal dates and the
requirements for reasonably available
control technology and measures (RACT
and RACM), reasonable further progress
(RFP), modeling and attainment
demonstrations, contingency measures,
and new source review. See 70 FR
71612 (November 29, 2005). The rule
was codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart
X.
The EPA announced the revocation of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
anti-backsliding requirements that apply
upon revocation, in a rulemaking that
established final implementation rules
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 80
FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Consistent
with the anti-backsliding provisions in
CAA section 172(e), the EPA included
1971; P.J. Drivas and F.H. Shair, A Tracer Study of
Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles Area,
Atmos. Environ. 8: 1155–1163. 4, 1974; T.B. Smith
et al. (ARB Contract to MRI/Caltech), ‘‘The Impact
of Transport from the South Coast Air Basin on
Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin,’’
1983).
7 2007 AQMP at 8–4.
8 2007 AQMP at 8–4, Table 8–2.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
anti-backsliding requirements that apply
upon revocation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Notwithstanding
revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, areas that were designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS at the time the standards
were revoked continue to be subject to
certain SIP requirements that had
previously applied based on area
classifications for the standards. Id. at
12296; 40 CFR 51.1105 and 51.1100(o).
Thus, in general, the Coachella Valley
remains subject to the requirements of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
applicable to ‘‘Severe’’ nonattainment
areas.
We discuss the CAA and regulatory
requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment plans in more detail
below.
III. CARB’s SIP Submittals To Address
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in
the Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Area
A. CARB’s SIP Submittals
Designation of an area as
nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to the EPA
a SIP providing for attainment of the
NAAQS under title 1, part D of the
CAA. For areas designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2004,
this attainment SIP was due by June 15,
2007. See CAA section 172(b). CARB
made the following five SIP submittals
to address the CAA planning
requirements for attaining the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS for the Coachella
Valley (and other areas as noted):
• ‘‘Final 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan,’’ South Coast Air
Quality Management District, June 2007
(2007 AQMP); 9
• ‘‘2007 State Strategy for the
California State Implementation Plan,’’
Release Date April 26, 2007 and
Appendices A—G, CARB, Release Date
May 7, 2007 (2007 State Strategy); 10
• ‘‘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,’’ CARB, Release Date: March
24, 2009 (2009 State Strategy Status
Report);
• ‘‘Progress Report on
Implementation of PM2.5 State
9 See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 28, 2007
with enclosures.
10 See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 16, 2007
with enclosures.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Implementation Plans (SIP) for the
South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air
Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,’’
CARB, Release Date March 29, 2011
(2011 State Strategy Progress Report);
and
• ‘‘Staff Report, Proposed Updates to
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, State
Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley
and Western Mojave Desert,’’ CARB,
Release Date: September 22, 2014 (2014
SIP Update).11
Additionally, on March 24, 2008,
CARB submitted an Ozone Early
Progress Plan 12 for several areas,
including the Coachella Valley. The
plan consisted of motor vehicle
emissions budgets for transportation
conformity. The EPA found the
Coachella Valley NOX and VOC budgets
adequate for the 1997 ozone standards,
effective May 22, 2008. See 73 FR 25694
(May 7, 2008).
In today’s proposal, we refer to the
portions of these documents relevant to
the Coachella Valley collectively as the
‘‘Coachella Valley Ozone Plan’’ or ‘‘the
Plan.’’ EPA has already approved
portions of these documents in actions
for other nonattainment areas.13
Similarly, in today’s proposal, we are
evaluating and proposing action on only
those portions of the 2007 AQMP that
are relevant to attainment of the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley. Below is a description of the
portions that are relevant to the
Coachella Valley.
2007 AQMP
The 2007 AQMP discusses attainment
of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for both the
South Coast Air Basin and Coachella
Valley, and the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS
for the South Coast Air Basin. We are
only acting on the ozone portions of the
2007 AQMP, and only on the portions
applicable to the Coachella Valley,
which includes the following sections of
the 2007 AQMP: the emissions
estimates, RFP demonstrations, and
motor vehicle emission budgets for the
Coachella Valley in Chapter 8; the
detailed base and future emission
inventories in Appendix III; the
modeling for the attainment
demonstration in Chapter 5 and
Appendix V; the control strategy in
Chapters 4 and 7; and the RACM
discussion in Chapter 6 and Appendix
VI.
State Strategy
The 2007 State Strategy, as amended
by the 2009 State Strategy Status Report
and 2011 State Strategy Progress Report,
provides a RACM demonstration for
mobile sources. The relevant portions of
the 2007 State Strategy include Chapter
3, which describes California’s SIP
commitments, and Chapter 5, which
lists individual measures in more detail,
as part of the State’s submittal. We note,
however, that other portions of the 2007
State Strategy contain additional
information relevant to Coachella
Valley, such as emissions reductions
from the Strategy contained in
Appendix A. Appendix F of the 2011
State Strategy Progress Report provides
revised control measure commitments
and a revised rule implementation
schedule for the 2007 AQMP.
2014 SIP Update
The 2014 SIP Update, which covers
both the Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas, updates the
following sections of the 2007 AQMP:
emissions inventories; RFP
demonstration, and vehicle miles
travelled (VMT) offset demonstration.
The 2014 SIP Update also updates the
motor vehicle emissions budgets in the
Ozone Early Progress Plan mentioned
75767
above. It also revises the attainment
targets for NOX and VOC emissions,
using the same percentage reduction
from the 2002 baseline as planned in the
2007 AQMP. Finally, the 2014 SIP
Update (and 2007 AQMP) also contain
contingency measures to be
implemented in the event the area fails
to meet an RFP milestone or fails to
attain by the applicable date, as required
by CAA section 172(c)(9). We are not
proposing action on these contingency
measures at this time. Contingency
measures are a distinct provision of the
Clean Air Act that we may act on
separately from the attainment
requirements.
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and
110(l) require a state to provide
reasonable public notice and
opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submittal of a SIP or
SIP revision. To meet this requirement,
every SIP submittal should include
evidence that adequate public notice
was given and an opportunity for a
public hearing was provided consistent
with the EPA’s implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
The SCAQMD and CARB provided
public notice and an opportunity for
public comment through public
comment periods, and held public
hearings prior to adopting the
components of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan. Hearing and adoption dates
are shown in Table 1. The SCAQMD’s
and CARB’s submittals both include
proof of publication for notices of the
District’s and CARB’s public hearings,
as evidence that all hearings were
properly noticed. Therefore, we find the
submittals meet the procedural
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)
and 110(l).
TABLE 1—AGENCIES AND ADOPTION DATES FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY ATTAINMENT PLAN FOR THE 1997 OZONE
STANDARDS
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Agency/Submittal
Start of public notice
Hearing and adoption dates
SCAQMD/2007 AQMP ............................................
CARB/2007 State Strategy ......................................
CARB/2007 AQMP ..................................................
CARB/2009 State Strategy Status Report ..............
CARB/2011 State Strategy Progress Report ..........
CARB/2014 SIP Update ..........................................
March 2, 2007 .........
May 7, 2007 ............
August 10, 2007 ......
March 24, 2009 .......
March 29, 2011 .......
September 22, 2014
June 1, 2007 ...........................................................
June 21 and 22, 2007, and July 27, 2007 ..............
September 27, 2007 ...............................................
April 23, 2009 ..........................................................
April 28, 2011 ..........................................................
October 24, 2014 ....................................................
11 See letter from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, U.S. EPA, dated November 6, 2014
with enclosures.
12 ‘‘Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress
Toward Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
Standards for Ozone and Setting Transportation
Conformity Budgets for Ventura County, Antelope
Valley—Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley,
Eastern Kern County, and Imperial County’’
(revised), CARB (February 27, 2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Board
resolution
07–9
07–28
07–41
09–34
11–24
14–29
13 For example, portions of the 2007 AQMP, 2007
State Strategy, and the 2011 State Strategy Progress
Report were approved in EPA actions on the
SCAQMD Attainment Plan for the 1997 8-hour
Ozone Standards. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012)
and 79 FR 52539 (September 3, 2014).
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75768
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that
the EPA determine whether a SIP
submittal is complete within 60 days of
receipt. This section of the CAA also
provides that any plan that the EPA has
not affirmatively determined to be
complete or incomplete will be deemed
complete by operation of law six
months after the date of submittal. The
EPA’s SIP completeness criteria are
found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.
The EPA’s completeness determinations
for each submittal are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2—SUBMITTALS AND COMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY OZONE PLAN
Submittal
2007
2007
2009
2011
2014
Submittal date
State Strategy ................................................................................
AQMP .............................................................................................
State Strategy Status Report .........................................................
State Strategy Progress Report .....................................................
SIP Update .....................................................................................
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions
Inventories
CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each
state with an ozone nonattainment area
classified under subpart 2 to submit a
‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources’’ of the relevant pollutants in
accordance with guidance provided by
the Administrator. While this inventory
is not a specific requirement under the
anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR
51.1105 and 51.1100(o), it provides
support for demonstrations required
under these anti-backsliding rules.
Completeness date
November 16, 2007 .......................
November 28, 2007 .......................
August 12, 2009 ............................
July 29, 2011 .................................
November 6, 2014 .........................
Additionally, a baseline emissions
inventory is needed for the attainment
demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. EPA’s 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as
the baseline year for the SIP planning
emissions inventory. See 69 FR 23980
(October 27, 2004). EPA emissions
inventory guidance sets specific
planning requirements pertaining to
future milestone years for reporting RFP
and to attainment demonstration
years.14 Key RFP analysis years in the
RFP demonstration include 2008 and
every subsequent 3 years until the
attainment date.
We have evaluated the emissions
inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan to determine if they are
consistent with EPA guidance and
May 14, 2008.
May 26, 2008.
February 8, 2010.
January 25 2012.
May 5, 2015.
adequate to support the Plan’s RACM,
RFP, rate of progress (ROP) and
attainment demonstrations.
2. Emissions Inventories in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update
contains detailed emissions inventories
for the Coachella Valley. A partial
summary of this information is
contained in Table 3. The average
summer weekday emissions typical of
the ozone season are used for the 2002
base year planning inventory and the
2018 attainment year.15 These
inventories incorporate reductions from
federal, state, and district control
measures received by CARB through
September 2012.
TABLE 3—COACHELLA VALLEY NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARIES FOR THE 2002 BASE YEAR AND 2018
ATTAINMENT YEAR
[Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] a
NOX
VOC
Category
2002
2018
2002
2018
Stationary Sources ..........................................................................................
Area Sources ...................................................................................................
On-Road Mobile Sources ................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources ......................................................................................
0.875
0.492
33.009
8.912
0.851
0.305
10.558
5.109
3.067
5.061
9.294
5.287
4.182
3.863
2.897
3.919
Totals b ......................................................................................................
43.287
16.823
22.709
14.861
a Source:
2014 SIP Update, Appendix A, Table A–1.
of rounding conventions, source categories may not add to the exact emission totals.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
b Because
The on-road motor vehicles inventory
category consists of trucks, automobiles,
buses, and motorcycles. California’s
model for estimating emissions from onroad motor vehicles operating in
California is referred to as ‘‘EMFAC’’
(short for EMission FACtor). EMFAC
has undergone many revisions over the
years. At the time the 2014 SIP Update
was submitted, EMFAC2011 was the
model approved by the EPA for
estimating on-road motor source
emissions in California.16 See 78 FR
14533 (March 6, 2013). Appendix D of
the 2014 SIP Update contains the latest
on-road motor vehicle summer planning
VOC and NOX inventories, vehicle
population, VMT and trips for each
14 ‘‘Emission Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations’’ (EPA–454/R–05–
001, August 2005, updated November 2005) and
‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards—Phase 2’’
(70 FR 71612).
15 ‘‘Attainment year’’ refers to the ozone season
immediately preceding a nonattainment area’s
attainment date. In the case of the Coachella Valley,
the applicable attainment date is June 15, 2019, and
the ozone season immediately preceding that date
will occur in year 2018.
16 EMFAC2011’s approval is granted in 78 FR
14533. More recently, the EPA approved
EMFAC2014 as the model for estimating on-road
emissions. That approval allowed the continued use
of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR
77337.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
EMFAC vehicle class category for the
Coachella Valley. The motor vehicle
emissions in the Plan are based on
CARB’s EMFAC2011 emission factor
model and the latest planning
assumptions from Southern California
Association of Government’s (SCAG’s)
2012–2035 Regional Transportation
Plan.17
The 2014 SIP Update contains offroad VOC and NOX inventories
developed by CARB using categoryspecific methods and models.18 The offroad mobile source category includes
aircraft, trains, ships, and off-road
vehicles and equipment used for
construction, farming, commercial,
industrial, and recreational activities.
The stationary source category of the
emissions inventory includes nonmobile, fixed sources of air pollution
comprised of individual industrial,
manufacturing, and commercial
facilities. Examples of stationary sources
(a.k.a., point sources) include fuel
combustion (e.g., electric utilities),
waste disposal (e.g., landfills), cleaning
and surface coatings (e.g., printing),
petroleum production and marketing,
and industrial processes (e.g., chemical).
Stationary source operators report to the
District the process and emissions data
used to calculate emissions from point
sources. The District then enters the
information reported by emission
sources into the California Emission
Inventory Development and Reporting
System (CEIDARS) database.19
The area sources category includes
aggregated emissions data from
processes that are individually small
and widespread or not well-defined
point sources. The area source
subcategories include solvent
evaporation (e.g., consumer products
and architectural coatings) and
miscellaneous processes (e.g.,
residential fuel combustion and farming
operations). Emissions from these
sources are calculated from product
sales, population, employment data, and
other parameters for a wide range of
17 SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan 2012–
2035, including Amendment #1 and #2 and the Air
Quality Conformity Analysis. April 2012. Federal
Highway Administration approval July 15, 2013.
18 Detailed information on CARB’s off-road motor
vehicle emissions inventory methodologies is found
at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/
categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles.
19 The CEIDARS database consists of two
categories of information: source information and
utility information. Source information includes the
basic inventory information generated and collected
on all point and area sources. Utility information
generally includes auxiliary data, which helps
categorize and further define the source
information. Used together, CEIDARS is capable of
generating complex reports based on a multitude of
category and source selection criteria.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
activities that generate air pollution in
the Coachella Valley.20
The emission inventories in the 2014
SIP Update use the California Emission
Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM).21
The CEPAM model used in the 2014 SIP
Update is based on a 2008 baseline
inventory developed using the methods
and databases described above (e.g.,
EMFAC2011; CEIDARS; and CARB
modular off-road equipment updates
such as the 2011 In-Use Off-Road
Equipment model, Transportation
Refrigeration Units model, and Cargo
Handling Equipment model.). The
inventory was calibrated to 2008
emissions and activity levels, and
inventories for other years are back-cast
(e.g., 2002) or forecast (e.g., 2018) using
CEPAM from that base inventory.22
3. Proposed Action on the Emissions
Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions
inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and the inventory
methodologies used by the District and
CARB for consistency with CAA section
182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We find
that the base year and projected
attainment year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventories of actual and projected
emissions of NOX and VOC in the
Coachella Valley as of the date of the
submittal. Accordingly, we propose to
find that these inventories provide an
appropriate basis for the various other
elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan, including the RACM, ROP, RFP,
and attainment demonstrations.
B. Reasonably Available Control
Measures Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
1. RACM Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that
each attainment plan provide for the
implementation of all reasonable
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and provide
for attainment of the NAAQS. The
RACM demonstration requirement is a
continuing applicable requirement for
20 Detailed information on the area-wide source
category emissions is found on the CARB Web site:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm.
21 Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains
the estimated VOC and NOX stationary, area-wide
and off-road forecast summaries by Emission
Inventory Code categories for the Coachella Valley
from CEPAM. A CEPAM inventory tool was created
to support the development of the 2012 PM2.5 SIPs
due at that time. The tool was designed to support
all of the modeling, planning, and reporting
requirements due at that time and includes updates
for all the pollutants (e.g., NOX and VOC). Modeling
results, which are summarized in Appendix A, are
available separately in electronic file format.
22 2014 SIP Update, page A–1
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75769
the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s
anti-backsliding rules that apply once a
standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
The EPA has previously provided
guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the ‘‘General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990’’
(‘‘General Preamble’’) 23 and in a
memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on
Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) Requirements and Attainment
Demonstration Submissions for the
Ozone NAAQS,’’ John Seitz, November
30, 1999 (Seitz memo).24 In summary,
EPA guidance provides that to address
the requirement to adopt all RACM,
states should consider all potentially
reasonable control measures for source
categories in the nonattainment area to
determine whether they are reasonably
available for implementation in that
area and whether they would, if
implemented individually or
collectively, advance the area’s
attainment date by one year or more.25
Any measures that are necessary to
meet these requirements that are not
already either federally promulgated,
part of the state’s SIP, or otherwise
creditable in SIPs must be submitted in
enforceable form as part of a state’s
attainment plan for the area. CAA
section 172(c)(6) requires nonattainment
plans to include enforceable emission
limitations, and such other control
measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as
fees, marketable permits, and auctions
of emission rights), as well as schedules
and timetables for compliance, as may
be necessary or appropriate to provide
for attainment of such standards in such
area by the applicable attainment date.
See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
The purpose of the RACM analysis is
to determine whether or not control
measures exist that are economically
and technically reasonable and that
provide emissions reductions that
23 See 57 FR 13498, 13560. The General Preamble
describes the EPA’s preliminary view on how we
would interpret various SIP planning provisions in
title I of the CAA as amended in 1990, including
those planning provisions applicable to the 1-hour
ozone standards. The EPA continues to rely on
certain guidance in the General Preamble to
implement the 8-hour ozone standards under
title I.
24 Available at www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/
t1pgm.html.
25 See Seitz memo and General Preamble at
13560; see also ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for Proposed Rulemaking on
Approval of Plan Revisions for Nonattainment
Areas,’’ 44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979) and
Memorandum dated December 14, 2000, from John
S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, ‘‘Additional Submission on RACM
from States with Severe One-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs.’’
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75770
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
would advance the attainment date for
nonattainment areas. The EPA defines
RACM as any potential control measure
for application to point, area, on-road
and non-road emission source categories
that: (1) Is technologically feasible; (2) is
economically feasible; (3) does not
cause ‘‘substantial widespread and longterm adverse impacts’’; (4) is not
‘‘absurd, unenforceable, or
impracticable’’; and (5) can advance the
attainment date by at least one year.
General Preamble at 13560.
For ozone nonattainment areas
classified as moderate or above, CAA
section 182(b)(2) also requires
implementation of RACT for all major
sources of VOC and for each VOC
source category for which the EPA has
issued a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document. CAA section 182(f)
requires that RACT under section
182(b)(2) also apply to major stationary
sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major
source is a stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 25
tons of VOC or NOX per year. CAA
section 182(d). Under the 8-hour ozone
implementation rule, states were
required to submit SIP revisions
meeting the RACT requirements of CAA
sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) no later
than 27 months after designation for the
8-hour ozone standards (September 15,
2006, for areas designated in April 2004)
and to implement the required RACT
measures no later than 30 months after
that submittal deadline. See 40 CFR
51.912(a). The EPA has approved the
RACT SIP for the SCAQMD for the 1997
ozone standards, which included rules
applicable to the Coachella Valley. See
73 FR 76947 (December 18, 2008).
2. Control Strategy and RACM
Demonstration in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
a. The District’s RACM Demonstration
Appendix VI of the 2007 AQMP
includes a RACM demonstration
covering both the South Coast Air Basin
and the Coachella Valley, which focuses
on control measures for stationary and
area sources. The process to identify
RACM involved public meetings to
solicit input, evaluation of the EPA’s
suggested RACM, and evaluation of air
emissions rules in other areas (including
the San Joaquin Valley, the San
Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento,
Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth, the
Houston-Galveston area and the Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium).
The District also reevaluated all 82 of its
existing rules and regulations. The
RACM evaluation process included a
summit where CARB technical experts,
local government representatives and
the public suggested alternative ways to
attain air quality standards. More than
200 potential control measures were
identified. The District then screened
the identified measures and rejected
those that would not individually or
collectively advance attainment in the
area by at least one year, had already
been adopted as rules, or were in the
process of being adopted. The remaining
measures were evaluated by taking into
account baseline inventories, available
control technologies, and potential
emission reductions as well as whether
the measure could be implemented on
a schedule that would advance
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards by at least a year.26
Based on this analysis, SCAQMD
scheduled 16 new or revised stationary
source control measures for
development and adoption, including
revisions to make SCAQMD rules at
least as stringent as other California
districts’ rules and several innovative
measures. Since submission of the
AQMP in 2007, the SCAQMD has
adopted 12 of these rules and submitted
them to the EPA for approval into the
SIP. Table 4 lists the measures
identified in the 2007 AQMP,27 with
citations to the Federal Register notice
that incorporates each measure into the
SIP, where applicable. These rules are
part of the District’s enforceable
commitment to achieve emissions
reductions. However, the District
acknowledged that its commitment to
adopt any given rule might prove to be
infeasible, meaning the control
technology may not be available or
achievement of the emissions
reductions may not be cost effective. In
adopting the 2007 AQMP, the SCAQMD
Board committed to ‘‘substitute any
other measures as necessary to make up
any emissions reduction shortfall.’’ 28
TABLE 4—STATUS OF RACM RULES IDENTIFIED IN SCAQMD 2007 AQMP
Control
measure
Ozone
precursor
controlled
Rule No.
Title
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
1144 ..........................
1143 ..........................
1147 ..........................
1111 ..........................
461 ............................
1149 ..........................
1110.2 .......................
MCS–01 ......
1146 ..........................
MCS–01 ......
1146.1 .......................
MCS–05 ......
1127 ..........................
Metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants ..........
Consumer Paint Thinners and Multi-Purpose Solvents
NOX reductions from miscellaneous sources ................
Further NOX reductions from space heaters .................
Gasoline transfer and dispensing (VOC) .......................
Storage Tank and Pipeline Cleaning and Degassing ....
Liquid and gaseous fuels—stationary ICEs (NOX and
VOC).
NOX from industrial, institutional, commercial boilers,
steam generators, and process heaters.
NOX from small ind, inst, & commercial boilers, steam
gens, and process heaters.
Livestock waste (VOC) ...................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
CTS–01
CTS–04
CMB–01
CMB–03
FUG–02
FUG–04
MCS–01
VOC ...................
VOC ...................
NOX ....................
NOX ....................
VOC ...................
VOC ...................
NOX and VOC ....
Federal Register notice
adopting
rule into the SIP
NOX ....................
76 FR 70888,
76 FR 70888,
75 FR 46845,
75 FR 46845,
78 FR 21543,
74 FR 67821,
74 FR 18995,
2009.
79 FR 57442,
11/16/2011.
11/16/2011.
08/04/2010.
08/04/2010.
04/11/2013.
12/21/2009.
April 27,
NOX ....................
79 FR 57442, 09/25/2014.
VOC ...................
78 FR 30768, 05/23/2013.
09/25/2014.
Measures not yet adopted or not approved in the SIP by EPA
EGM–01 .....
FLX–02 .......
MOB–05 .....
26 2007
2301 ..........................
(proposed) ................
n/a .............................
Emissions reductions from new or redevelopment
projects (Indirect Sources).
Refinery pilot program (VOC) ........................................
VOC ...................
Title 13 Cal. Code of
Regulations § 2622.
AB923 LDV high emitter program ..................................
NOX and VOC ....
AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI–1 and 2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
27 2007
PO 00000
AQMP, Tables 4–1, 4–2A and 4–2B.
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX and VOC ....
No rule associated with this
measure.a
No rule associated with this
measure.
n/a.b
28 Attachment A of the 2007 AQMP, SCAQMD
Board Resolution 07–9, dated June 1, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
75771
TABLE 4—STATUS OF RACM RULES IDENTIFIED IN SCAQMD 2007 AQMP—Continued
Control
measure
Rule No.
Title
Ozone
precursor
controlled
MOB–06 .....
Title 13 Cal. Code of
Regulations § 2622.
2449 ..........................
AB923 MDV high emitter program .................................
NOX and VOC ....
n/a.b
SOON program ..............................................................
NOX ....................
(proposed approval) 81 FR
12637, 03/10/2016.
n/a ...............
Federal Register notice
adopting
rule into the SIP
a
The District has not finalized Rule 2301.
SCAQMD implements this program through CARB’s Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program.
n/a = not applicable.
b
The EPA determined that the 2007
AQMP met the RACM requirement for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the
South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674
(March 1, 2012).29 CARB submitted a
2012 Air Quality Management Plan
(2012 AQMP), developed by the
SCAQMD, in February 2013 with
additional information about the
Coachella Valley, including data and
discussion on air quality, pollutant
transport, emissions inventories,
attainment demonstration, and
projections of future air quality.30 For
the 2012 AQMP, the SCAQMD followed
a process similar to that used for the
2007 AQMP, which included public
meetings to solicit input, evaluation of
EPA’s suggested RACM, and evaluation
of other air agencies’ regulations. See
Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. The
District states in the 2012 AQMP that
‘‘the 2007 AQMP adequately addressed
and satisfied the CAA planning
requirements for ozone in the Coachella
Valley, and this chapter [Chapter 7:
Current & Future Air Quality—Desert
Nonattainment Areas] is for information
only.’’ The 2012 AQMP does, however,
include a new RACM demonstration.
See Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. It
includes new and revised rules for the
District since the adoption of the 2007
AQMP. The EPA approved the RACM
demonstration in the 2012 AQMP as a
revision to the SIP for both the 1-hour
and 1997 8-hour ozone standards for the
South Coast Air Basin. See 79 FR 52526
(September 3, 2014). Many of the new
rules have been incorporated into the
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
29 More
recently, the EPA determined that the
South Coast RECLAIM program did not meet RACM
for PM2.5 because it allowed facilities to delay
installation of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to
control NOX emissions. See 81 FR 22025 (April 14,
2016). Only two facilities in Coachella Valley are
part of the RECLAIM program and both facilities
have an oxidation catalyst and SCR on each gas
turbine. The Title V Permits for these facilities are
included in the administrative record for this
action. Additionally, SCAQMD Rule 2005 requires
all emissions sources at any new or relocated
RECLAIM facility to apply the best available control
technology.
30 Final Air Quality Management Plan, February
2013, South Coast Air Quality Management District.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
SIP,31 some have been proposed by the
District but not incorporated into the
SIP,32 and others have yet to be
proposed locally.
c. Local Jurisdiction RACM
Demonstration
With respect to on-road mobile
sources, we note that SCAG is the
designated metropolitan planning
organization (MPO) for a large portion of
southern California, including Coachella
Valley, and SCAG’s membership
includes local jurisdictions within the
Coachella Valley. For the 2007 AQMP,
SCAG evaluated a list of possible
transportation control measures (TCMs)
as one element of the larger RACM
evaluation for the plan. TCMs are, in
general, measures designed to reduce
emissions from on-road motor vehicles
through reductions in VMT or traffic
congestion. SCAG’s TCM development
process is described in Appendix IV–C
(‘‘Regional Transportation Strategy and
Control Measures’’) of the 2007 AQMP,
pages 49 to 55.
In our final action on the 2007 AQMP
for the South Coast Air Basin, we
concluded that the evaluation processes
undertaken by SCAG were consistent
with the EPA’s RACM guidance and
found that there were no additional
RACM, including no additional TCMs
that would advance attainment of the
1997 8-hour ozone standards in the
South Coast Air Basin. See 76 FR 57872,
at 57883 (September 16, 2011)
(proposed rule); 77 FR 12674 (March 1,
2012) (final rule). More recently, we
came to the same conclusion with
respect to RACM and TCMs for the
South Coast in our action on the ozone
portion of the 2012 AQMP. See 79 FR
29712, at 29720 (May 23, 2014)
(proposed rule); 79 FR 52526
(September 3, 2014) (final rule).
While TCMs are being implemented
in the upwind South Coast Air Basin
31 For example, CMB–03: Reductions from
Commercial Space Heating (Rule 1111) and FUG–
02: Emission Reduction from LPG Transfer and
Dispensing—Phase II (Rule 1177).
32 For example, CMB–01: Further NO
X
Reductions from RECLAIM.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
area to meet CAA requirements, neither
the SCAQMD nor CARB rely on
implementation of any TCMs in the
Coachella Valley to demonstrate
implementation of RACM in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The
SCAQMD and CARB justify the absence
of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by
reference to the significant influence of
pollutant transport from the South Coast
Air Basin on ozone conditions in the
Coachella Valley. We agree that
pollutant transport from the South Coast
Air Basin is significant, and find that,
given the influence of such transport
and the minimal and diminishing
emissions benefit generally associated
with TCMs, no TCM or combination of
TCMs implemented in the Coachella
Valley would advance the attainment
date in the Coachella Valley, and thus,
no TCMs are reasonably available for
implementation in the Coachella Valley
for the purposes of meeting the RACM
requirement. Lastly, we note that, while
not required for CAA purposes, SCAG’s
most recent Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) (April 2016) includes a list of
projects for the Coachella Valley, some
of which represent the types of projects
often identified as TCMs, such as traffic
signalization projects and bike lane
projects. See the transportation system
project list for Riverside County,
attached as an appendix to SCAG’s
2016–2014 RTP/SCS (April 2016),
available at https://scagrtpscs.net/
Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_
ProjectList.pdf.
d. The State Strategy RACM
Demonstration
CARB has primary responsibility for
reducing emissions in California from
new and existing on-road and off-road
engines and vehicles, motor vehicle
fuels, and consumer products. Given the
need for significant emissions
reductions from mobile sources to meet
the ozone standards in California
nonattainment areas, CARB has been a
leader in the development of stringent
control measures for on-road and offroad mobile sources, fuels and
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75772
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
consumer products. Because of this role,
the 2007 AQMP identifies CARB’s 2007
State Strategy as a key component of the
control strategy necessary to attain the
1997 ozone standards. The 2007 State
Strategy includes measures to reduce
emissions from multiple sectors,
including in-use heavy duty trucks,
smog check improvements,
reformulated gasoline, cleaner off-road
equipment, cleaner consumer products,
ships, harbor craft and port trucks. See
2007 State Strategy, Chapter 5.
CARB developed its 2007 State
Strategy after an extensive public
consultation process to identify
potential SIP measures. From this
process, CARB identified and
committed to propose 15 new defined
measures. These measures focus on
cleaning up the in-use fleet as well as
increasing the stringency of emissions
standards for a number of engine
categories, fuels, and consumer
products. Many, if not most, of these
measures have been adopted or are
being proposed for adoption for the first
time anywhere in the nation. They build
on CARB’s already comprehensive
program described above that addresses
emissions from all types of mobile
sources and consumer products,
through both regulations and incentive
programs.
In adopting the 2007 State Strategy,
CARB committed to reducing Coachella
Valley NOX emissions by 7 tons per day
(tpd) and VOC emissions by 2 tpd
through the implementation of measures
identified in the 2007 State Strategy.33
However, this proposed action does not
rely on the NOX and VOC commitments
in the 2007 State Strategy, because the
2014 SIP Update shows that the
Coachella Valley would meet the NOX
and VOC attainment and RFP goals,
under existing rules received through
September 2012.34
CARB adopted the 2009 State Strategy
Status Report in April 2009. This
submittal updated the 2007 State
Strategy to reflect its implementation
during 2007 and 2008, and also to
reflect changes resulting from the
adoption of the scoping plan mandated
by Assembly Bill 32 that will help
reduce ozone during SIP
implementation.35 The update also
changes assumptions about economic
conditions and the availability of
incentive funds.36 Finally, the 2007
State Strategy was revised to address
33 Board
Resolution 07–28, CARB, September 27,
2007, page 7, Attachment B.
34 2014 SIP Update, page A–1.
35 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
36 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
approvability issues brought up by the
EPA.37
CARB again revised the state strategy
in the 2011 State Strategy Progress
Report. While the changes primarily
address attainment of the 1997 PM2.5
standards, the 2011 State Strategy
Progress Report also includes an
appendix that updates the control
measure adoption schedule and revises
the emissions estimates to reflect
changes made by CARB to the on-road
truck and off-road equipment rules in
2010.38
We have previously determined that
CARB’s mobile source control programs
constituted RACM for the attainment
plan for the 1997 Ozone NAAQS in the
South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674
(March 1, 2012). Since then, CARB has
adopted additional mobile source
control measures including the
Advanced Clean Cars program (also
known as the Low Emission Vehicle
Program III or LEV–III), heavy-duty
vehicle idling rules, revisions to CARB’s
in-use rules for on-road and non-road
diesel vehicles, and emissions standards
for non-road equipment, cargo handling
equipment, and recreational vehicles.
See 81 FR 39424 (June 18, 2016).
3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the Control
Strategy and RACM
For the Coachella Valley in 2017 (the
year prior to the attainment year), the
emissions inventory shows that nearly
all of the locally generated NOX
emissions (93%) and nearly half of the
VOC emissions (48%) derive from
mobile sources.39 Mobile source
emissions are well controlled
throughout California because of
stringent control measures in place for
on-road and off-road mobile sources and
fuels. See, e.g., 2007 State Strategy, p.
37. Additionally, as noted above, the
EPA has already determined CARB’s
rules in the 2007 State Strategy, as
revised in 2009 and 2011, meet RACM,
and CARB continues to adopt new and
more stringent mobile source rules. In
view of the transport of pollutants into
the Coachella Valley from the South
Coast Air Basin (see discussion at
section I.B above) and the extensive
control of mobile sources by CARB, we
propose to find that the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan provides for
implementation of all RACM necessary
to demonstrate expeditious attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in
37 2009
State Strategy Status Report, page 2.
State Strategy Progress Report at
Appendix F (‘‘Revisions to 2007 P.M.2.5 and Ozone
State Implementation Plan for South Coast Air
Basin and Coachella Valley’’) (March 2011).
39 Based on data from Tables A–1 and A–2 of the
2014 SIP Update.
38 2011
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the Coachella Valley, consistent with
the applicable requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
C. Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for Attainment
Demonstrations
CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) requires
states with ozone nonattainment areas
classified as ‘‘Serious’’ or above to
submit plans that demonstrate
attainment of the ozone NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the specified attainment date. For
any ozone nonattainment area classified
as serious or above, section 182(c)(2)(A)
of the CAA specifically requires the
State to submit a modeled attainment
demonstration based on a
photochemical grid modeling evaluation
or any other analytical method
determined by the Administrator to be
at least as effective as photochemical
modeling. The attainment
demonstration requirement is a
continuing applicable requirement for
the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s
anti-backsliding rules that apply once a
standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12).
For more detail on the requirements
for modeling an 8-hour ozone
attainment demonstration, see the
Technical Support Document (TSD) for
today’s proposal. The modeling section
of the TSD includes a complete list of
applicable modeling guidance
documents. These documents describe
the components of the attainment
demonstration, explain how the
modeling and other analyses should be
conducted, and provide overall
guidance on the technical analyses for
attainment demonstrations.
As with any predictive tool, inherent
uncertainties are associated with
photochemical grid modeling. The
EPA’s guidance recognizes these
limitations and provides recommended
approaches for considering other
analytical evidence to help assess
whether attainment of the NAAQS is
likely. This process is called a weight of
evidence (WOE) analysis.
The EPA’s modeling guidance
(updated in 1996, 1999, and 2002)
discusses various WOE analyses. This
guidance was updated again in 2005
and 2007 for the 1997 8-hour attainment
demonstration procedures to include a
WOE analysis as an integral part of any
attainment demonstration. This
guidance strongly recommends that all
attainment demonstrations include
supplemental analyses beyond the
recommended modeling. These
supplemental analyses can provide
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
additional information such as data
analyses, and emissions and air quality
trends, which can help strengthen the
conclusion based on the photochemical
grid modeling.
2. 8-Hour Attainment Demonstration
Modeling and Weight of Evidence
Analysis in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
a. Photochemical Grid Modeling
Attainment Demonstration Results
i. Photochemical Grid Model
The model selected for the 2007
AQMP attainment demonstrations is the
Comprehensive Air Quality Model with
Extensions (CAMx), version 4.4
(Environ, 2006), using Statewide Air
Pollution Research Center-99 (SAPRC–
99) gas phase mechanisms (Carter,
2000).40 The modeling system
(including the photochemical model,
meteorological inputs, and chemical
mechanism) is consistent with the
previous advice of outside peer
reviewers. CAMx is a state-of-the-art air
quality model that can simulate ozone
and PM2.5 concentrations together in a
‘‘one-atmosphere’’ approach for
attainment demonstrations. CAMx is
designed to integrate the output from
both prognostic and diagnostic
meteorological models.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ii. Episode Selection
Six meteorological episodes from
three years are used as the basis for the
plan. An earlier modeling effort,
contained in SCAQMD’s 2003 Air
Quality Management Plan, benefited
from the intensive monitoring
conducted under the 1997 Southern
California Ozone Study (SCOS 1997)
where the August 4–7, 1997, episode
was the cornerstone of the modeling
analysis. One of the primary modeling
episodes used in the earlier modeling
from August 5–6, 1997, was also
selected for this plan. In addition, five
episodes that occurred during the
Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III
(MATES–III) sampling program in 2004
(August 7–8) and 2005 (May 21–22, July
15–19, August 4–6, and August 27–28)
were selected.41 The TSD for today’s
proposal provides further information.
iii. Model Performance
The modeling for the Coachella Valley
attainment demonstration uses the same
approach used for the South Coast Air
Basin attainment demonstration, which
40 Carter, W.P.L., May 8, 2000a. Documentation of
the SAPRC–99 chemical mechanism for VOC
reactivity assessment. Report to the California Air
Resources Board, Contracts 92–329 and 95–308.
41 Final Report, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure
Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES–III),
SCAQMD, September 2008.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
was based on an air quality modeling
domain that covers the entire South
Coast Air Basin, the Coachella Valley,
and much of southern California. Model
performance was evaluated in three
zones in the South Coast Basin: The San
Fernando Valley; the eastern San
Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino
Valleys; and Los Angeles and Orange
County. Normalized Gross Bias,
Normalized Gross Error, and Peak
Prediction Accuracy were determined
for each area. Although not a
requirement for determining acceptable
model performance, the performance
statistics were compared to the EPA
performance goals presented in
guidance documents. The performance
goals for Normalized Gross Error and
Peak Prediction Accuracy were met in
the eastern San Gabriel, Riverside and
San Bernardino Valleys. In general, the
statistic for bias (Normalized Gross Bias)
tends to be negative, indicating that the
model tends to slightly under-predict
ozone. Based on the analysis, the
SCAQMD concludes that model
performance is acceptable for this
application.
b. Modeling Approaches for the
Coachella Valley Attainment
Demonstration
CAMx simulations were conducted
for the base year 2002, and future-year
2017 baseline and controlled
emissions.42 The ozone attainment
demonstration relies on the use of sitespecific relative response factors (RRFs)
being applied to the 2002 weighted
design values. The RRFs are determined
from the future year controlled and the
2002 base year simulations. The initial
screening for station days to be included
in the attainment demonstration
included the following criteria: (1)
Having an observed concentration
equaling or exceeding 85 parts per
billion (ppb), and (2) a simulation
predicted base year (1997, 2004 or 2005)
concentration over 60 ppb. Additional
criteria were added to the selection
process as the simulations were
evaluated. A minimum of five episode
days are recommended to determine the
site specific RRF. The TSD for today’s
action has more information regarding
the rationale for our proposed approval
of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
modeling.
c. Results of Modeling
The attainment demonstration
included in the 2007 AQMP indicates
42 Future year controlled emissions were
estimated from the baseline emissions using the
CEPA control factors for the simulations, are given
in Table V–4–4 of the 2007 South Coast AQMP,
Appendix V.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75773
that the Coachella Valley will attain the
federal 1997 8-hour ozone standards by
the proposed attainment date of June 15,
2019. The 2007 AQMP projects the
Coachella Valley air monitoring stations
of Palm Springs and Indio to have 8hour ozone design values of 75.9 ppb
and 66.2 ppb respectively in the year
2017.43 More recent modeling in the
2012 AQMP, as well as recent
monitoring data, shows attainment by
the 2018 attainment year. See the TSD
for this action for more information.
d. Transport From the South Coast Air
Basin
The South Coast Air Basin’s
continued progress toward meeting the
1997 ozone NAAQS is critical to the
Coachella Valley’s ability to attain the
1997 ozone standards. The Coachella
Valley is downwind of the South Coast
Air Basin, which is regulated by the
SCAQMD. The 2007 AQMP states,
‘‘pollutant transport from the South
Coast Air Basin to the Coachella Valley
is the primary cause of its ozone
nonattainment status.’’ The plan cites
several studies that confirm the
transport between the two air basins.44
3. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Conclusions on the Modeling
Demonstration
We are proposing to approve an
attainment date of June 15, 2019, which
reflects a 2018 attainment year. This is
based on our evaluation of the air
quality modeling analyses in the 2007
AQMP and our WOE analysis. The WOE
analysis considered the attainment
demonstration from the 2012 AQMP
and more recent ambient air quality
monitoring data that were not available
at the time SCAQMD performed the
attainment modeling. The basis for our
proposed approval is discussed in more
detail in the TSD. The modeling shows
significant reductions in ozone from the
base period. The most recent ambient
air quality data that we have reviewed
indicate that the area is on track to
attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
by 2018.
Based on the analysis above and in
the TSD, the EPA proposes to find that
the air quality modeling in the 2007
AQMP provides an adequate basis for
the RACM, RFP and attainment
demonstrations in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan, and is consistent with the
applicable requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(a) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1)
and 51.1100(o)(12).
43 2007 AQMP, Appendix V, page V–4–52, Table
V–4–17.
44 See footnote 6.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75774
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable
Further Progress Demonstrations
1. Rate of Progress
a. Requirements
For areas classified as moderate or
above, Section 182(b)(1) requires a SIP
revision providing for rate of progress
(ROP), defined as a one time, 15%
actual VOC emission reduction during
the six years following the baseline year
1990, or an average of 3% per year. For
areas designated serious nonattainment
or above, no further action is necessary
if the area fulfilled its ROP requirement
for the 1-hour standards (from 1990–
1996). As the EPA explained in the 1997
Ozone Implementation Rule, 69 FR
23980 (October 27, 2004), for areas that
did not meet the 15% ROP reduction for
the 1-hour ozone standards, a state may
notify the EPA that it wishes to rely on
a previously submitted SIP (for the 1hour ozone standards), or it may elect to
submit a new or revised SIP (for the
1997 ozone standards) addressing the
15% ROP reduction. The ROP
demonstration requirement is a
continuing applicable requirement for
the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s
anti-backsliding rules that apply once a
standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
The CAA outlines and EPA guidance
details the method for calculating the
requirements for the 1990–1996 period.
Section 182(b)(1) requires that
reductions: (1) Be in addition to those
needed to offset any growth in
emissions between the base year and the
milestone year; (2) exclude emission
reductions from four prescribed federal
programs (i.e., the federal motor vehicle
control program, the federal Reid vapor
pressure (RVP) requirements, any RACT
corrections previously specified by the
EPA, and any inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program corrections
necessary to meet the basic I/M level);
and (3) be calculated from an ‘‘adjusted’’
baseline relative to the year for which
the reduction is applicable.
The adjusted base year inventory
excludes the emission reductions from
fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996
and from federal RVP regulations
promulgated by November 15, 1990, or
required under section 211(h) of the
Act. The net effect of these adjustments
is that states are not able to take credit
for emissions reductions that would
result from fleet turnover of current
federal standard cars and trucks, or from
already existing federal fuel regulations.
However, the SIP can take full credit for
the benefits of any new (i.e., post-1990)
vehicle emissions standards, as well as
any other new federal or state motor
vehicle or fuel program that will be
implemented in the nonattainment area,
including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new
evaporative emissions standards,
reformulated gasoline, enhanced I/M,
California low emissions vehicle
program, transportation control
measures, etc.
While a SIP revision for attainment of
the 1-hour ozone standards was
submitted for the Southeast Desert area
(i.e., the Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert areas), we have not
approved the ROP plan for the
reduction of VOCs. We provided notice
that the Southeast Desert has attained
the 1-hour standards on April 15, 2015.
See 80 FR 20166 (April 15, 2015). Per
40 CFR 51.1118, the RFP requirement
(including the 15% ROP requirement for
VOCs) no longer applies to the 1-hour
ozone standards for the Southeast Desert
area. Although the ROP provision is a
one-time requirement, it remains in
effect for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. Therefore, the Coachella
Valley SIP must demonstrate a 15%
ROP for VOC reductions by 2008, from
the 2002 baseline.
b. ROP Demonstration in the State
Submittal
The 2014 SIP Update incorporates the
ROP demonstration as an element of the
RFP demonstration. We note that this
approach is valid, but different from the
organization of this notice, where we
first, and separately, assess the ROP
demonstration and then assess the RFP
demonstration. See section IV.D.2 for
the RFP assessment. VOC emissions
from the RFP tables for the Coachella
Valley (see Table C–1 in the 2014 SIP
Update), were used to create Table 5
below. The revised 15% ROP VOC
demonstration uses a 2002 average
summer weekday emissions inventory
as the base year inventory and addresses
2002–2008. Based on the progress of the
VOC emissions reductions from 2002 to
2008, the State concluded the Coachella
Valley met the ROP requirement for the
15% VOC reduction.
TABLE 5—15% RATE-OF-PROGRESS DEMONSTRATION FOR VOC EMISSIONS IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY a
Coachella
(tpsd)
VOC Emissions
1.
2.
3.
4.
2002 baseline inventory ..................................................................................................................................................................
2008 remaining emissions ...............................................................................................................................................................
2008 goal (remaining emissions after 15% ROP Reduction required from 2002 baseline) ..........................................................
ROP reduction achieved by 2008 (Compare Line 2 to Line 7) ......................................................................................................
a Source:
2014 SIP Update, Table C–1.
2. Reasonable Further Progress
a. Requirements
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
22.7
17.6
19.3
Yes
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1)
require plans for nonattainment areas to
provide for RFP. RFP is defined in
section 171(1) as ‘‘such annual
incremental reductions in emissions of
the relevant air pollutant as are required
by this part or may reasonably be
required by the Administrator for the
purpose of ensuring attainment of the
applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable
date.’’ CAA section 182(c)(2)(B) requires
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
serious or higher to submit no later than
3 years after designation for the 8-hour
ozone standards an RFP SIP providing
for an average of 3% per year of VOC
and/or NOX emissions reductions for (1)
the 6-year period immediately following
the baseline year; and (2) all remaining
3-year periods after the first 6-year
period out to the area’s attainment date.
The RFP requirement is a continuing
applicable requirement for the
Coachella Valley under the EPA’s antibacksliding rules that apply once a
standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for
the substitution of NOX emission
reductions in place of VOC reductions
to meet the RFP requirements.
According to the EPA’s NOX
Substitution Guidance,45 the
substitution of NOX reductions for VOC
reductions must be done on a
percentage basis, rather than a straight
ton-for-ton exchange. There are two
steps for substituting NOX for VOC.
First, an equivalency demonstration
45 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, ‘‘NOX Substitution Guidance,’’
December 1993.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75775
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
must show that the cumulative RFP
emission reductions are consistent with
the NOX and VOC emission reductions
determined in the ozone attainment
modeling demonstration. Second,
specified reductions in NOX and VOC
emissions should be accomplished in
the interim period between the 2002
base year and the attainment date,
consistent with the continuous RFP
emission reduction requirement.
b. RFP Demonstration in the State
Submittal
The 2014 SIP Update contains
emissions estimates for the baseline,
milestone and attainment years, and
additional discussion of the RFP
demonstration. See page 5 and Table C–
1 in Appendix C. Table 6 below shows
data from the RFP demonstration, with
additional rows based on information
provided by CARB. The 2014 SIP
Update uses NOX substitution beginning
in milestone year 2014 to meet VOC
emission targets. For the Coachella
Valley, the State concluded that RFP
demonstration meets the applicable
requirements for each milestone year as
well as the attainment year.
TABLE 6—CALCULATION OF RFP DEMONSTRATIONS FOR COACHELLA VALLEY a
VOC Emission calculations (tpd)
2002
1. 2002 Baseline VOC .............................
2. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments ....................................................
3. RACT Corrections ................................
4. Adjusted 2002 baseline VOC inventory
(2002 Baseline VOC¥Line 2¥Line 3)
5. RFP Commitment for VOC reductions
from new measures ..............................
6. Future Year VOC with existing and
proposed measures ..............................
7. Required VOC % change since previous milestone year, relative to 2002
8. Required VOC reduction from 2002
adjusted baseline .................................
9. Target VOC Levels b ............................
10. Apparent VOC Shortfall (Line
6¥Line 9) .............................................
11. Apparent % VOC shortfall (Line 10 ÷
Line 4 ....................................................
12. VOC shortfall previously provided by
NOX substitution % (Line 13 of prior
milestone year, or 0 if negative) ..........
13. Actual VOC shortfall (Line 11¥Line
12) ........................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
NOX Emission calculations (tpd)
2008
2011
2014
2017
2018
22.7
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
1.1
0
1.5
0
1.8
0
1.9
0
2.0
0
n/a
21.6
21.2
20.9
20.8
20.7
n/a
0
0
0
0
0
n/a
17.6
15.0
15.8
15.8
15.9
n/a
15%
9%
9%
9%
3%
n/a
n/a
15%
18.4
24%
16.4
33%
14.7
42%
13.3
45%
12.8
n/a
¥0.8
¥1.3
1.2
2.6
3.2
n/a
¥3.7%
¥6.4%
5.6%
12.7%
15.3%
n/a
0
0
0
5.6%
12.7%
n/a
¥3.7%
¥6.4%
5.6%
7.1%
2.5%
2002
2008
2011
2014
2017
2018
43.3
31.0
23.8
c 22.0
c 18.9
c 17.8
n/a
1.6
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.3
n/a
41.7
41.3
41.1
41.0
40.9
n/a
0
0
0
0
0
n/a
41.7
41.3
41.1
41.0
40.9
n/a
10.6
17.5
19.1
22.1
23.1
n/a
25.6%
42.3%
46.5%
53.9%
56.5%
n/a
0
0
0
5.6%
12.7%
n/a
0.0%
0.0%
5.6%
7.1%
2.5%
n/a
n/a
15. Baseline NOX inventory .....................
16. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments ..............................................
17. Adjusted 2002 baseline NOX inventory (Line 15 2002 baseline¥Line 16)
18. RFP commitment for NOX reductions
from new measures ..............................
19. Calculated NOX creditable reductions
since 2002 (Line 17¥Line 18) .............
20. Change in NOX since 2002 (Line
19¥Line 15) .........................................
21. Calculated % NOX reductions since
2002 (Line 20 ÷ Line 19) ......................
22. NOX previously used for VOC shortfall by NOX substitution % (from Line
12) ........................................................
23. NOX substitution needed for VOC
shortfall % (Same as Line 13, or 0 if
Line 9 < 0) ............................................
24. Forecasted % NOX reduction surplus
(Line 21¥Line 22¥Line 23) ................
25. RFP achieved? ..................................
25.6%
Yes
42.3%
Yes
40.9%
Yes
41.2%
Yes
41.3%
Yes
a Source:
2014 SIP Update, Table C–1.
VOC levels for 2008 = (1¥Line 8) × (Line 4). In subsequent years, Target VOC = [(prior year Line 9 + prior year Line 2¥current year
line 2) × (1¥current year line 7)].
c Estimated emissions include an additional 1 tpd safety margin for transportation conformity budget.
Note: Because of rounding conventions, values in table may not reflect the exact calculated quantity from the underlying numbers.
b Target
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75776
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP
Demonstrations
Based on our review of the ROP
calculations in the 2014 SIP Update,
summarized in Table 5 above, we
conclude that the state has
demonstrated that sufficient emission
reductions have been achieved to meet
the ROP requirements in 2008. And as
shown in Table 6, the South Coast 2007
8-hour Ozone SIP provides for RFP in
each milestone year, consistent with
applicable CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. We therefore propose to
approve the ROP and RFP
demonstrations under sections 182(b)(1)
and 182(c)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets
CAA section 176(c) requires federal
actions in nonattainment and
maintenance areas to conform to the
goals of SIPs. This means that such
actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute
to violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen
the severity of an existing violation, or
(3) delay timely attainment of any
NAAQS or any interim milestone.
Actions that involve Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) or Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funding
or approval are subject to the EPA’s
transportation conformity rule, which is
codified in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
Under this rule, metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment
and maintenance areas coordinate with
state and local air quality and
transportation agencies, the EPA,
FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that an
area’s RTP and transportation
improvement programs (TIP) conform to
the applicable SIP. This demonstration
is typically done by showing that
estimated emissions from existing and
planned highway and transit systems
are less than or equal to the motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or
budgets) contained in the SIP. An
attainment, RFP, or maintenance SIP
establishes MVEBs for the attainment
year, each required RFP year or last year
of the maintenance plan, as appropriate.
MVEBs are generally established for
specific years and specific pollutants or
precursors. Ozone attainment and RFP
plans establish MVEBs for NOX and
VOC. See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
Before an MPO may use MVEBs in a
submitted SIP, the EPA must first either
determine that the MVEBs are adequate
or approve the MVEBs. In order for us
to find the MVEBs adequate and
approvable, the submittal must meet the
conformity adequacy requirements of 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5) and be
approvable under all pertinent SIP
requirements. To meet these
requirements, the MVEBs must be
consistent with the approvable
attainment and RFP demonstrations and
reflect all of the motor vehicle control
measures contained in the attainment
and RFP demonstrations. See 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more
information on the transportation
conformity requirements and applicable
policies on MVEBs, please visit our
transportation conformity Web site at:
https://www.epa.gov/state-and-localtransportation.
The EPA’s process for determining
adequacy of a MVEB consists of four
basic steps: (1) Providing public
notification of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to
comment on the MVEB during a public
comment period and responding to any
comments that are submitted; (3)
reviewing the submitted SIP to
determine if it meets the adequacy
criteria; and, (4) making a finding of
adequacy or inadequacy. See 40 CFR
93.118.
2. MVEBs in the Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan
The 2007 AQMP did not propose
budgets for transportation conformity
for the Coachella Valley. CARB
submitted the 2008 Early Progress Plan,
an amendment to the SIP, to establish
MVEBs for many areas of California
including the Coachella Valley.46 Using
EMFAC2007 (the 2007 version of the
EMissions FACtor model), CARB set the
2012 MVEBs at 7 tpd for VOCs and 26
tpd for NOX. We found the MVEB in the
2008 Early Progress Plan for the
Coachella Valley to be adequate for
transportation conformity
purposes.47 See 73 FR 25694 (April 16,
2008).
The 2014 SIP Update includes
updated MVEBs.48 As noted in Section
IV.B.2 of this notice, the MVEBs were
estimated using EMFAC2011, and the
latest planning assumptions from SCAG,
including Amendment No. 1 to the
2012–2035 Regional Transportation
Plan and Amendment No. 13–4 to the
Federal Transportation Improvement
Program.49 The emissions estimate also
includes off-model adjustments to
EMFAC2011 to account for the
Advanced Clean Car regulations
adopted by CARB and included in the
SIP. See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016).
The MVEBs are the projected on-road
mobile source VOC and NOX emissions
in the Coachella Valley for baseline,
milestone and attainment years. These
budgets, shown in Table 7, include a 1
tpd safety margin, as allowed by the
conformity rule. See 40 CFR 93.124(a).
TABLE 7—COACHELLA VALLEY MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS IN THE 2014 SIP UPDATE
[tpd, average summer weekday] a
NOX
2014
On-Road Inventory ...................................
Safety Margin ...........................................
MVEBs b ...................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
a Source:
14.79
1
16
VOC
2017
2018
11.39
1
13
2014
10.74
1
12
2017
3.72
1
5
2018
3.07
1
5
2014 SIP Update, Appendix D, Table D–1.
up to the nearest ton.
b Rounded
46 Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress
Toward Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality
Standards for Ozone and Setting Transportation
Conformity Budgets for Ventura County, Antelope
Valley—Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
Eastern Kern County, Imperial County, Revised:
February 27, 2008, Release Date: February 27, 2008.
47 Letter dated April 16, 2008 from Deborah
Jordan to James Goldstene, California Air Resources
Board, RE: Adequacy Status of Coachella Valley 8-
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
hour Ozone Early Progress Plan Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets.
48 2014 SIP Update, Table D–1.
49 See https://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/
Amendment-1.aspx.
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
2.93
1
4
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
3. Proposed Action on the Budgets
As part of our review of the budgets’
approvability, we have evaluated the
revised budgets using our adequacy
criteria in 40 CFR 93.318(e)(4) and (5).
We found that the 2017 and 2018
budgets meet each adequacy criterion.
We have completed our review of the
2014 SIP Update and are proposing to
approve the SIP’s attainment and RFP
demonstrations. We have also reviewed
the proposed budgets submitted with
the 2014 SIP Update and have found
that the 2017 and 2018 budgets are
consistent with the attainment and RFP
demonstrations, were based on control
measures that have already been
adopted and implemented, and meet all
other applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements including the
adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
and (5). Therefore, we are proposing to
approve the 2017 and 2018 budgets as
shown in Table 7.50 Once these budgets
are found adequate or are approved, the
budgets for the 2008 early progress plan
for 2012 will no longer be used in
transportation conformity
determinations. If finalized as proposed,
the U.S. Department of Transportation
and SCAG (the metropolitan planning
organization for the area) would be
required to use the new budgets in
transportation conformity
determinations.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions
Offset Demonstration
1. Requirements for a VMT Emissions
Offset Demonstration
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a
state with areas classified as ‘‘Severe’’ or
‘‘Extreme’’ to ‘‘submit a revision that
identifies and adopts specific
enforceable transportation control
strategies (TCSs) and TCMs to offset any
growth in emissions from growth in
VMT or numbers of vehicle trips in such
area.’’ Herein, we refer to the SIP
requirement as the ‘‘VMT emissions
offset requirement,’’ and the SIP
revision intended to demonstrate
compliance with the VMT emissions
offset requirement as the ‘‘VMT
emissions offset demonstration.’’ The
VMT emissions offset requirement is a
continuing applicable requirement for
the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s
anti-backsliding rules that apply once a
standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also
includes two additional elements
requiring that the SIP include: (1) TCSs
50 Although the 2014 SIP Update contained
MVEBs for 2014, 2017, and 2018, MVEBs for 2014
are no longer relevant for conformity analyses since
that year has passed.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
and TCMs as necessary to provide
(along with other measures) the
reductions needed to meet the
applicable RFP requirement, and (2)
include strategies and measures to the
extent needed to demonstrate
attainment. As noted above, the first
element of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A)
requires that areas classified as ‘‘Severe’’
or ‘‘Extreme’’ submit a SIP revision that
identifies and adopts TCSs and TCMs
sufficient to offset any growth in
emissions from growth in VMT or the
number of vehicle trips.
In response to the Court’s decision in
Association of Irritated Residents v.
EPA,51 we issued a memorandum titled
Guidance on Implementing Clean Air
Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation
Control Measures and Transportation
Control Strategies to Offset Growth in
Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle
Miles Travelled (August 2012
Guidance).52 The August 2012 Guidance
discusses the meaning of the terms TCSs
and TCMs, and recommends that both
TCSs and TCMs be included in the
calculations made for the purpose of
determining the degree to which any
hypothetical growth in emissions due to
growth in VMT should be offset.
Generally, TCS is a broad term that
encompasses many types of controls
including, for example, motor vehicle
emission limitations, I/M programs,
alternative fuel programs, other
technology-based measures, and TCMs,
that would fit within the regulatory
definition of ‘‘control strategy.’’ See,
e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n). TCM is defined
at 40 CFR 51.100(r) to mean ‘‘any
measure that is directed toward
reducing emissions of air pollutants
from transportation sources,’’ including,
but not limited to, measures listed in
CAA section 108(f), and generally refers
to programs intended to reduce the
VMT, the number of vehicle trips, or
traffic congestion, such as programs for
improved public transit, designation of
certain lanes for passenger buses and
high-occupancy vehicles, trip reduction
ordinances, and similar measures.
The August 2012 guidance also
explains how states may demonstrate
that the VMT emissions offset
51 632 F.3d. 584, at 596–597 (9th Cir. 2011),
reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d
668, further amended February 13, 2012 (ruling
additional TCMs are required whenever vehicle
emissions are projected to be higher than they
would have been had VMT not increased, even
when aggregate vehicle emissions are actually
decreasing).
52 Memorandum dated August 30 2012 from Karl
Simon, Director, Transportation and Climate
Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
to Carl Edlund, Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah
Jordan, Director, Air Division, EPA Region 9.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75777
requirement is satisfied in conformance
with the Court’s ruling. It recommends
states estimate emissions for the
nonattainment area’s base year and the
attainment year. One emission
inventory is developed for the base year,
and three different emissions inventory
scenarios are developed for the
attainment year. Two of these scenarios
would represent hypothetical emissions
scenarios that would provide the basis
to identify the ‘‘growth in emissions’’
due solely to the growth in VMT, and
one that would represent projected
actual motor vehicle emissions after
fully accounting for projected VMT
growth and offsetting emissions
reductions obtained by all creditable
TCSs and TCMs. The August 2012
guidance contains specific details on
how states might conduct the
calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions
inventory should be based on VMT in
that year and it should reflect all
enforceable TCSs and TCMs in place in
the base year. This would include
vehicle emissions standards, state and
local control programs such as I/M
programs or fuel rules, and any
additional implemented TCSs and
TCMs that were already required by or
credited in the SIP as of the base year.
The first of the emissions calculations
for the attainment year would be based
on the projected VMT and trips for that
year, and assume that no new TCSs or
TCMs beyond those already credited in
the base year inventory have been put
in place since the base year. This
calculation demonstrates how emissions
would hypothetically change if no new
TCSs or TCMs were implemented, and
VMT and trips were allowed to grow at
the projected rate from the base year.
This estimate would show the potential
for an increase in emissions due solely
to growth in VMT and trips,
representing a no-action scenario.
Emissions in the attainment year in this
scenario may be lower than those in the
base year due to fleet turnover to loweremitting vehicles. Emissions may also
be higher if VMT and/or vehicle trips
are projected to sufficiently increase in
the attainment year.
The second of the attainment year
emissions calculations would also
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs
beyond those already credited have
been put in place since the base year,
but would also assume no growth in
VMT and trips between the base year
and attainment year. Like the no-action
attainment year estimate described
above, emissions in the attainment year
may be lower than those in the base year
due to fleet turnover, but the emissions
would not be influenced by any growth
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75778
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
in VMT or trips. This emissions
estimate, the VMT offset ceiling
scenario, would reflect the maximum
attainment emissions that should be
allowed to occur under the statute as
interpreted by the Court because it
shows what would happen under a
scenario in which no offsetting TCSs or
TCMs have yet been put in place and
VMT and trips are held constant during
the period from the area’s base year to
its attainment year.
These two hypothetical status quo
estimates are necessary steps in
identifying target emission levels. These
levels determine whether further TCMs
or TCSs beyond those that have been
adopted and implemented are needed to
fully offset any increase in emissions
due solely to VMT and vehicle trips
identified in the no action scenario.
The third calculation incorporates the
emissions that are actually expected to
occur in the area’s attainment year after
taking into account reductions from all
enforceable TCSs and TCMs that in
reality were put in place after the
baseline year. This estimate would be
based on the VMT and trip levels
expected to occur in the attainment year
(i.e., the VMT and trip levels from the
first estimate) and all of the TCSs and
TCMs expected to be in place and for
which the SIP will take credit in the
area’s attainment year, including any
TCMs and TCSs put in place since the
base year. This represents the projected
actual (attainment year) scenario. If this
emissions estimate is less than or equal
to the emissions ceiling that was
established in the second of the
attainment year calculations, the TCSs
or TCMs for the attainment year would
be sufficient to fully offset the identified
hypothetical growth in emissions.
If the projected actual attainment year
emissions are greater than the VMT
offset ceiling established in the second
of the attainment year emissions
calculations even after accounting for
post-baseline year TCSs and TCMs, the
state would need to adopt and
implement additional TCSs or TCMs. To
meet the VMT offset requirement of
section 182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by
the Court, the additional TCSs or TCMs
would need to offset the growth in
emissions and bring the actual
emissions down to at least the same
level as the attainment year VMT offset
ceiling estimate.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Emissions
Offset Demonstration
The Coachella Valley VMT Offset
demonstration is contained in Appendix
E of the 2014 SIP Update. The State
used EMFAC2011,53 an EPA-approved
motor vehicle emissions model for
California, to estimate on-road
emissions. The model calculates
emissions from two combustion
processes (i.e., running exhaust and
start exhaust) and four evaporative
processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses,
diurnal losses, and resting losses). It
combines trip-based VMT data from the
regional transportation planning
agencies (i.e., SCAG), starts data based
on household travel surveys, and
vehicle population data from the
California Department of Motor
Vehicles. These sets of data are
combined with corresponding emission
rates to calculate emissions.
Emissions from running exhaust, start
exhaust, hot soak, and running losses
are a function of how much a vehicle is
driven. As such, emissions from these
processes are directly related to VMT
and vehicle trips, and the State included
emissions from them in the calculations
that provide the basis for the revised
Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration. The 2014 SIP Update
(see page E–3) did not include
emissions from resting loss and diurnal
loss processes in the analysis because
such emissions are related to vehicle
population, rather than VMT or vehicle
trips, and thus are not part of ‘‘any
growth in emissions from growth in
vehicle miles traveled or numbers of
vehicle trips in such area’’ (emphasis
added) under CAA section 182(d)(1)(A).
The VMT emissions offset
demonstration also includes the
previously described three different
attainment year scenarios (i.e., no
action, VMT offset ceiling, and
projected actual) for 2018. The State’s
selection of 2018 is appropriate given
that the 2014 SIP Update demonstrates
attainment by the applicable attainment
date of June 15, 2019 based on the 2018
controlled emissions inventory. Table 8
summarizes the emissions estimate for
the base year and the three scenarios
discussed in Section IV.G.1.b.
TABLE 8—VMT EMISSIONS OFFSET INVENTORY SCENARIOS AND RESULTS FOR 1997 8-HOUR OZONE STANDARDS a
VMT
Scenario
1000 miles/
day
Year
Base Year ................................................
No Action .................................................
VMT Offset Ceiling ...................................
Projected Actual .......................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
a Source:
Starts
2002
2018
2002
2018
10,293
14,329
14,329
64,709
Year
Controls
1000/day
2002
2018
2002
2018
1,248
10,640
7,935
10,640
VOC
Emissions
Year
tpd
2002
2002
2002
2018
2014 SIP Update, Appendix E.
For the base year scenario, CARB ran
the EMFAC2011 model for the 2002
base year using VMT and starts data
corresponding to those years. As shown
in Table 8, the 2014 SIP Update
estimates Coachella Valley VOC
emissions to be 8 tpd in 2002.
For the no-action scenario, the State
first identified the on-road motor
vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs or
TCMs) put in place since the base year
and incorporated into EMFAC2011.
Then, CARB ran EMFAC2011 with the
VMT and starts data corresponding to
the applicable attainment year (i.e.,
2018 for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards) without the emissions
reductions from the on-road motor
vehicle control programs put in place
after the base year. Thus, the no action
scenario reflects the hypothetical VOC
53 More recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014
as the model for estimating on-road emissions;
however, that approval allowed the continued use
of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR
77337.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
8
4
3
2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
emissions that would occur in the
attainment year in the nonattainment
area if CARB had not put in place any
additional TCSs or TCMs after 2002. As
shown in Table 8, CARB estimates no
action VOC emissions for Coachella
Valley to be 4 tpd in 2018.
For the VMT offset ceiling scenario,
the State ran the EMFAC2011 model for
the attainment year but with VMT and
starts data corresponding to base year
values. Like the no- action scenario, the
EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to
reflect VOC emissions levels in the
attainment year without the benefits of
the on-road motor vehicle control
programs implemented after the base
year. Thus, the VMT offset ceiling
scenario reflects hypothetical VOC
emissions if the State had not put in
place any TCSs or TCMs after the base
year and if there had been no growth in
VMT or vehicle trips between the base
year and the attainment year. As shown
in Table 8, CARB estimates VMT offset
ceiling VOC emissions to be 3 tpd in
2018.
The hypothetical growth in emissions
due to growth in VMT and trips can be
determined from the difference between
the VOC emissions estimates under the
no action scenario and the
corresponding estimate for the VMT
offset ceiling scenario. Based on the
values in Table 9, the hypothetical
growth in emissions due to growth in
VMT and trips in the Coachella Valley
would have been 1 tpd (i.e., 4 tpd minus
3 tpd) for the purposes of the revised
VMT emissions offset demonstration for
the 8-hour ozone standards. This
hypothetical difference establishes the
level of emissions caused by growth in
VMT that need to be offset by the
combination of post-baseline year TCMs
and TCSs and any necessary additional
TCMs and TCSs.
For the projected actual scenario
calculation, the State included the
emissions benefits from TCSs and
TCMs 54 put in place since the base year.
The most significant State on-road and
fuels measures providing reductions
during the 2002 to 2018 timeframe and
relied upon for the VMT emissions
offset demonstration include Low
Emission Vehicles II and Zero
Emissions Vehicle standards, California
Reformulated Gasoline Phase 3, and
Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks.
Some of these measures were adopted
54 The 2014 SIP Update states, ‘‘there are no
TCMs in the SIP for the Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert because upwind emissions
from the South Coast Air Basin and Ventura County
largely influence air quality in both the Coachella
Valley and Western Mojave Desert. TCMs have been
implemented by the SCAG in those upwind areas.’’
(Appendix E, p. E–3)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
prior to 2002, but all or part of the
implementation occurred after 2002.55
State measures adopted since 2007, as
part of the 2009 State Strategy Status
Report, and the associated reductions
are also described in the IV.B.2.d of this
notice. The 2014 SIP Update provides a
list of CARB rules for mobile sources,
since 1990 through the plan’s
development, in Table E–4.
3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the VMT
Emissions Offset Demonstration
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstrations established 2002
as the base year for the purpose of the
VMT emissions offset demonstration for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. The
base year for VMT emissions offset
demonstration purposes should
generally be the same base year used for
nonattainment planning purposes. In
today’s action, the EPA is proposing to
approve the 2002 base year inventory
for Coachella Valley for the purposes of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus,
CARB’s selection of 2002 as the base
year for the VMT emissions offset
demonstration for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards is appropriate.
As shown in Table 8, the results from
these calculations establish projected
actual attainment-year VOC emissions
of 2 tpd in the Coachella Valley for the
1997 8-hour standards demonstration.
By comparing these values against the
corresponding VMT offset ceiling value,
we can determine whether additional
TCMs or TCSs would need to be
adopted and implemented to offset any
increase in emissions due solely to VMT
and trips. Because the projected actual
emissions are less than the
corresponding VMT offset ceiling
emissions, the State’s demonstration
shows compliance with the VMT
emissions offset requirement. This
means that the adopted TCSs and TCMs
are sufficient to offset the growth in
emissions from the growth in VMT and
vehicle trips in Coachella Valley for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards. Taking
into account the creditable post-baseline
year TCMs and TCSs, the demonstration
shows Coachella Valley offset
hypothetical growth in emissions due to
growth in VMT by 2 tpd of VOC, which
is more than the required 1 tpd offset.56
55 Appendix E of the SIP Update contains a full
list of the TCSs adopted by the state since 1990.
56 The offsetting VOC emissions reductions from
the TCSs and TCMs put in place after the base year
can be determined by subtracting the ‘‘projected
actual’’ emissions estimates from the ‘‘no action’’
emissions estimates in table 8. For the purposes of
the 8-hour ozone demonstration, the offsetting
emissions reductions, 2 tpd (4 tpd minus 2 tpd),
exceed the growth in emissions from growth in
VMT and vehicle trips (1 tpd).
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75779
Based on our review of the 2014 SIP
Update, we find the State’s analysis to
be acceptable and agree that the State
has adopted sufficient TCSs and TCMs
to offset the growth in emissions from
growth in VMT and vehicle trips in the
Coachella Valley for the purposes of the
1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus we
find that the VMT emissions offset
demonstration for this area complies
with the VMT emissions offset
requirement in CAA section
182(d)(1)(A), consistent with 40 CFR 40
CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
Therefore, we propose approval of the
revised VMT emissions offset
demonstration for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards, contained in the 2014
SIP Update, as a revision to the
California SIP.
V. The EPA’s Proposed Actions
A. The EPA’s Proposed Approvals
For the reasons discussed above, the
EPA is proposing to approve the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Plan
includes the relevant portions of the
following documents: (1) ‘‘Final 2007
Air Quality Management Plan,’’ South
Coast Air Quality Management District,
June 2007; (2) CARB’s ‘‘2007 State
Strategy for the California State
Implementation Plan,’’ Release Date
April 26, 2007 and Appendices A–G,
Release Date May 7, 2007; (3) CARB’s
‘‘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,’’ Release Date:
March 24, 2009; (4) CARB’s ‘‘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,’’
Release Date March 29, 2011; and (5)
CARB’s ‘‘Staff Report, Proposed Updates
to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard,
State Implementation Plans; Coachella
Valley and Western Mojave Desert,’’
Release Date: September 22, 2014.
The EPA is proposing to approve the
following elements of the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan under CAA section
110(k)(3):
1. The RACM demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17);
2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations
as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and
40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4);
3. The attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12);
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
75780
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules
4. 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) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
We are also approving the revised
MVEBs for RFP 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 sections 176(c)
and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
B. Request for Public Comments
The EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document or on other relevant
matters. We will accept comments from
the public on this proposal for the next
30 days. We will consider these
comments before taking final action.
VI. 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.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA because this action does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities beyond those imposed by state
law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. This action does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Oct 31, 2016
Jkt 241001
the private sector, will result from this
action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175, because the SIP is not
approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area
where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. The EPA believes that this
action is not subject to the requirements
of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
The EPA lacks the discretionary
authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
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: October 19, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
IX.
[FR Doc. 2016–26376 Filed 10–31–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA–R02–OAR–2016–0161; FRL–9954–59Region 2]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Plans for Designated Facilities and
Pollutants; New York, New Jersey and
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; Other
Solid Wsate Incineration Units (OSWIs)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129
negative declaration for the States of
New York and New Jersey and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,for other
solid waste incineration units(OSWIs)
units. Other solid waste incineration
(OSWI) unit means either a very small
municipal waste combustion unit or an
institutional waste incineration unit
within our regulations. This negative
declaration certifies that existing OSWI
units subject to sections 111(d) and 129
of the CAA do not exist within the
jurisdiction of the Sates of New York
and New Jersey or the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico. The EPA is accepting the
negative declaration in accordance with
the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 1, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02–
OAR–2016—to https://
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM
01NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 1, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75764-75780]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26376]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0244; FRL-9954-76-Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; Coachella Valley; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of California to provide for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards in the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area. The EPA is proposing to find the emissions
inventories to be acceptable and to approve the reasonably available
control measures, transportation control strategies and measures, rate
of progress and reasonable further progress demonstrations, attainment
demonstration, vehicle miles traveled offset demonstration and the
transportation conformity motor vehicle emission budgets.
DATES: Any comments must be submitted by December 1, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2016-0244 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any
[[Page 75765]]
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically on the www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Kelly, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-3856,
kelly.thomasp@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Area
A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone Standards
B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs
III. CARB's SIP Submittals to Address the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards in the Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
A. CARB's SIP Submittals
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP
Submittals
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and
Adopted Control Strategy
C. Attainment Demonstration
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstrations
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions Offset Demonstration
V. The EPA's Proposed Actions
A. The EPA's Proposed Approvals
B. Request for Public Comments
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Area
A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone Standards
Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including
on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ California plans use the term Reactive Organic Gases (ROG)
for VOC. These terms are essentially synonymous. For simplicity, we
use the term VOC herein to mean either VOC or ROG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects
occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in children and adults
with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms
and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases. Ozone exposure also has
been associated with increased susceptibility to respiratory
infections, medication use, doctor visits, as well as emergency
department visits and hospital admissions for individuals with lung
disease. Ozone exposure also increases the risk of premature death from
heart or lung disease. Children are at increased risk from exposure to
ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are more likely
to be active outdoors, which increases their exposure. See ``Fact
Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone'' (January 6, 2010); 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010).
In 1979, under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA
established primary and secondary national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or standards) for ozone at 0.12 parts per million
(ppm) averaged over a 1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the primary and secondary
standards for ozone to set the acceptable level of ozone in the ambient
air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period (``1997 8-hour ozone
standards''). See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA set the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard based on scientific evidence demonstrating that
ozone causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and over
longer periods of time than was understood when the previous 1-hour
ozone standards were set. The EPA determined that the 1997 8-hour
standards would be more protective of human health, especially for
children and adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with a
pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma.\2\ In 2008, the EPA
revised and strengthened the NAAQS for ozone by setting the acceptable
level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour
period. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). In 2015, the EPA further
tightened the 8-hour ozone standards to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October
26, 2015). While the 1979 1-hour ozone standards and the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards have been revoked, certain requirements that had
applied under the revoked standards continue to apply under the anti-
backsliding provisions of CAA section 172(e), including an approved
attainment plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On March 27, 2008, the EPA revised and further strengthened
the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone by setting the acceptable
level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an 8-
hour period (``2008 8-hour ozone standards''). See 73 FR 16436. On
May 21, 2012, the EPA designated areas of the country with respect
to the 2008 8-hour ozone standards. See 77 FR 30088 and 40 CFR
81.330. On October 1, 2015, the EPA again strengthened the primary
and secondary NAAQS for ozone in ambient air to 0.070 ppm averaged
over 8 hours. See 80 FR 65292. For nonattainment areas classified as
``serious'' under the 2008 ozone standards, such as the Coachella
Valley, attainment SIPs were due on July 21, 2016. We will evaluate
the 2008 attainment SIPs in the timeframes specified by the CAA. We
have not yet set SIP submittal dates for the 2015 8-hour ozone
standards. Today's action applies only to the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards and does not address requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-
hour ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as
attaining or not attaining the standards. Effective June 15, 2004, we
designated nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. See
69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). The designations and classifications for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for California areas are codified at 40
CFR 81.305. In a rule governing certain facets of implementation of the
8-hour ozone
[[Page 75766]]
standards (the Phase 1 Rule), the EPA classified the Coachella Valley
as ``Serious'' for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, with an attainment
date no later than June 15, 2013. See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). On
November 28, 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB or State)
requested that the EPA reclassify the Coachella Valley 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area from ``Serious'' to ``Severe-15.'' The EPA granted
the reclassification, effective June 4, 2010, with an attainment date
of not later than June 15, 2019. See 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
The Coachella Valley area is located within Riverside County. For a
precise description of the geographic boundaries of the area, see 40
CFR 81.305. The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or District). The
District and CARB are responsible for adopting and submitting a state
implementation plan (SIP) to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for
nonattainment areas in their jurisdiction.
Air quality in the Coachella Valley has steadily improved in recent
years. Design values have declined from 0.108 ppm in 2003 to 0.088 ppm
in 2015.\3\ Design values are used to designate and classify
nonattainment areas, as well as to assess progress towards meeting the
air quality standards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Design values for 2000 to 2006 are contained in Figure 8-5
of the 2007 AQMP. Design values for 2005 to 2015 are contained in
the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) Preliminary Design Value Report for
the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert (September 7, 2016).
These documents are in the docket for today's action.
\4\ For more information about ozone design values, see 40 CFR
50, Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coachella Valley is downwind from the South Coast Air Basin,
which is also regulated by the SCAQMD. The South Coast Air Basin's
continued progress toward meeting the 1997 Ozone standards is critical
to the Coachella Valley attaining the 1997 ozone standards. The
SCAQMD's Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (2007 AQMP) states,
``pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin to the Coachella
Valley is the primary cause of its ozone nonattainment status.'' \5\
The 2007 AQMP cites several studies that confirm the transport between
the two air basins.\6\ It also describes the late daily peak in ozone
concentrations, 6:00 p.m. for Palm Springs, as indicative of pollution
that has been transported. The 2007 AQMP states, ``if this peak [in
ozone concentrations] were locally generated, it would be occurring
near mid-day and not in the late afternoon or early evening.'' \7\ The
2007 AQMP also compares the relative magnitudes of VOC and
NOX emissions in the Coachella Valley and the South Coast
Air Basin, showing average annual VOC emissions to be 30-40 times
greater in the South Coast Air Basin than in the Coachella Valley, and
average annual NOX emissions to be more than 20 times
greater in the South Coast Air Basin.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast Air
Quality Management District, June 2007, see page 8-1.
\6\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4 (citing R.W. Keith (SCAQMD) A
Climatological/Air Quality Profile, California South Coast Air
Basin, 1980; E.K. Kauper (Pollution Res. & Control Corp.), Coachella
Valley Air Quality Study, Final Report, (County Contract & U.S.
Public Health Service Grant No. 69-A-0610), 1971; P.J. Drivas and
F.H. Shair, A Tracer Study of Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles
Area, Atmos. Environ. 8: 1155-1163. 4, 1974; T.B. Smith et al. (ARB
Contract to MRI/Caltech), ``The Impact of Transport from the South
Coast Air Basin on Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin,''
1983).
\7\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4.
\8\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4, Table 8-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs
States must implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standards under Title
1, Part D of the CAA, which 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
ozone nonattainment problems, the EPA issued an implementation rule for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards (``1997 Ozone Implementation Rule'').
This rule was finalized in two phases. The first phase of the rule
addressed classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards,
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 addressed SIP submittal dates and
the requirements for reasonably available control technology and
measures (RACT and RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP), modeling
and attainment demonstrations, contingency measures, and new source
review. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). The rule was codified at
40 CFR part 51, subpart X.
The EPA announced the revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and
the anti-backsliding requirements that apply upon revocation, in a
rulemaking that established final implementation rules for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Consistent with the
anti-backsliding provisions in CAA section 172(e), the EPA included
anti-backsliding requirements that apply upon revocation of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. Notwithstanding revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, areas that were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS at the time the standards were revoked continue to be
subject to certain SIP requirements that had previously applied based
on area classifications for the standards. Id. at 12296; 40 CFR 51.1105
and 51.1100(o). Thus, in general, the Coachella Valley remains subject
to the requirements of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS applicable to
``Severe'' nonattainment areas.
We discuss the CAA and regulatory requirements for 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment plans in more detail below.
III. CARB's SIP Submittals To Address the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
in the Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
A. CARB's SIP Submittals
Designation of an area as nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to the EPA a SIP providing for attainment
of the NAAQS under title 1, part D of the CAA. For areas designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2004,
this attainment SIP was due by June 15, 2007. See CAA section 172(b).
CARB made the following five SIP submittals to address the CAA planning
requirements for attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
Coachella Valley (and other areas as noted):
``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast
Air Quality Management District, June 2007 (2007 AQMP); \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 28,
2007 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``2007 State Strategy for the California State
Implementation Plan,'' Release Date April 26, 2007 and Appendices A--G,
CARB, Release Date May 7, 2007 (2007 State Strategy); \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer,
CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9,
November 16, 2007 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``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,'' CARB, Release
Date: March 24, 2009 (2009 State Strategy Status Report);
``Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5
State
[[Page 75767]]
Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley
Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,'' CARB, Release Date March 29,
2011 (2011 State Strategy Progress Report); and
``Staff Report, Proposed Updates to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard, State Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert,'' CARB, Release Date: September 22, 2014 (2014 SIP
Update).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See letter from Richard Corey, Executive Officer CARB, to
Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, dated November
6, 2014 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, on March 24, 2008, CARB submitted an Ozone Early
Progress Plan \12\ for several areas, including the Coachella Valley.
The plan consisted of motor vehicle emissions budgets for
transportation conformity. The EPA found the Coachella Valley
NOX and VOC budgets adequate for the 1997 ozone standards,
effective May 22, 2008. See 73 FR 25694 (May 7, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ ``Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress Toward
Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality Standards for Ozone and
Setting Transportation Conformity Budgets for Ventura County,
Antelope Valley--Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, Eastern
Kern County, and Imperial County'' (revised), CARB (February 27,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In today's proposal, we refer to the portions of these documents
relevant to the Coachella Valley collectively as the ``Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan'' or ``the Plan.'' EPA has already approved portions of
these documents in actions for other nonattainment areas.\13\
Similarly, in today's proposal, we are evaluating and proposing action
on only those portions of the 2007 AQMP that are relevant to attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley. Below is a
description of the portions that are relevant to the Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For example, portions of the 2007 AQMP, 2007 State
Strategy, and the 2011 State Strategy Progress Report were approved
in EPA actions on the SCAQMD Attainment Plan for the 1997 8-hour
Ozone Standards. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012) and 79 FR 52539
(September 3, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 AQMP
The 2007 AQMP discusses attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for both
the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley, and the 1997 p.m.2.5
NAAQS for the South Coast Air Basin. We are only acting on the ozone
portions of the 2007 AQMP, and only on the portions applicable to the
Coachella Valley, which includes the following sections of the 2007
AQMP: the emissions estimates, RFP demonstrations, and motor vehicle
emission budgets for the Coachella Valley in Chapter 8; the detailed
base and future emission inventories in Appendix III; the modeling for
the attainment demonstration in Chapter 5 and Appendix V; the control
strategy in Chapters 4 and 7; and the RACM discussion in Chapter 6 and
Appendix VI.
State Strategy
The 2007 State Strategy, as amended by the 2009 State Strategy
Status Report and 2011 State Strategy Progress Report, provides a RACM
demonstration for mobile sources. The relevant portions of the 2007
State Strategy include Chapter 3, which describes California's SIP
commitments, and Chapter 5, which lists individual measures in more
detail, as part of the State's submittal. We note, however, that other
portions of the 2007 State Strategy contain additional information
relevant to Coachella Valley, such as emissions reductions from the
Strategy contained in Appendix A. Appendix F of the 2011 State Strategy
Progress Report provides revised control measure commitments and a
revised rule implementation schedule for the 2007 AQMP.
2014 SIP Update
The 2014 SIP Update, which covers both the Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, updates
the following sections of the 2007 AQMP: emissions inventories; RFP
demonstration, and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) offset demonstration.
The 2014 SIP Update also updates the motor vehicle emissions budgets in
the Ozone Early Progress Plan mentioned above. It also revises the
attainment targets for NOX and VOC emissions, using the same
percentage reduction from the 2002 baseline as planned in the 2007
AQMP. Finally, the 2014 SIP Update (and 2007 AQMP) also contain
contingency measures to be implemented in the event the area fails to
meet an RFP milestone or fails to attain by the applicable date, as
required by CAA section 172(c)(9). We are not proposing action on these
contingency measures at this time. Contingency measures are a distinct
provision of the Clean Air Act that we may act on separately from the
attainment requirements.
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require a state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet
this requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that
adequate public notice was given and an opportunity for a public
hearing was provided consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations
in 40 CFR 51.102.
The SCAQMD and CARB provided public notice and an opportunity for
public comment through public comment periods, and held public hearings
prior to adopting the components of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
Hearing and adoption dates are shown in Table 1. The SCAQMD's and
CARB's submittals both include proof of publication for notices of the
District's and CARB's public hearings, as evidence that all hearings
were properly noticed. Therefore, we find the submittals meet the
procedural requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
Table 1--Agencies and Adoption Dates for the Coachella Valley Attainment Plan for the 1997 Ozone Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing and adoption Board
Agency/Submittal Start of public notice dates resolution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD/2007 AQMP.................... March 2, 2007.................... June 1, 2007........... 07-9
CARB/2007 State Strategy............ May 7, 2007...................... June 21 and 22, 2007, 07-28
and July 27, 2007.
CARB/2007 AQMP...................... August 10, 2007.................. September 27, 2007..... 07-41
CARB/2009 State Strategy Status March 24, 2009................... April 23, 2009......... 09-34
Report.
CARB/2011 State Strategy Progress March 29, 2011................... April 28, 2011......... 11-24
Report.
CARB/2014 SIP Update................ September 22, 2014............... October 24, 2014....... 14-29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 75768]]
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that the EPA determine whether a
SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section of
the CAA also provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively
determined to be complete or incomplete will be deemed complete by
operation of law six months after the date of submittal. The EPA's SIP
completeness criteria are found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The
EPA's completeness determinations for each submittal are shown in Table
2.
Table 2--Submittals and Completeness Determinations for the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submittal Submittal date Completeness date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 State Strategy............. November 16, 2007. May 14, 2008.
2007 AQMP....................... November 28, 2007. May 26, 2008.
2009 State Strategy Status August 12, 2009... February 8, 2010.
Report.
2011 State Strategy Progress July 29, 2011..... January 25 2012.
Report.
2014 SIP Update................. November 6, 2014.. May 5, 2015.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each state with an ozone
nonattainment area classified under subpart 2 to submit a
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources'' of the relevant pollutants in accordance with guidance
provided by the Administrator. While this inventory is not a specific
requirement under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.1105 and
51.1100(o), it provides support for demonstrations required under these
anti-backsliding rules. Additionally, a baseline emissions inventory is
needed for the attainment demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. EPA's 1997 Ozone Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as
the baseline year for the SIP planning emissions inventory. See 69 FR
23980 (October 27, 2004). EPA emissions inventory guidance sets
specific planning requirements pertaining to future milestone years for
reporting RFP and to attainment demonstration years.\14\ Key RFP
analysis years in the RFP demonstration include 2008 and every
subsequent 3 years until the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' (EPA-454/R-05-001, August
2005, updated November 2005) and ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-
Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards--Phase 2'' (70 FR
71612).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have evaluated the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan to determine if they are consistent with EPA guidance and
adequate to support the Plan's RACM, RFP, rate of progress (ROP) and
attainment demonstrations.
2. Emissions Inventories in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains detailed emissions
inventories for the Coachella Valley. A partial summary of this
information is contained in Table 3. The average summer weekday
emissions typical of the ozone season are used for the 2002 base year
planning inventory and the 2018 attainment year.\15\ These inventories
incorporate reductions from federal, state, and district control
measures received by CARB through September 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ``Attainment year'' refers to the ozone season immediately
preceding a nonattainment area's attainment date. In the case of the
Coachella Valley, the applicable attainment date is June 15, 2019,
and the ozone season immediately preceding that date will occur in
year 2018.
Table 3--Coachella Valley NOX and VOC Emissions Inventory Summaries for the 2002 Base Year and 2018 Attainment
Year
[Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC
Category ---------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2018 2002 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Sources.............................. 0.875 0.851 3.067 4.182
Area Sources.................................... 0.492 0.305 5.061 3.863
On-Road Mobile Sources.......................... 33.009 10.558 9.294 2.897
Other Mobile Sources............................ 8.912 5.109 5.287 3.919
---------------------------------------------------------------
Totals \b\.................................. 43.287 16.823 22.709 14.861
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix A, Table A-1.
\b\ Because of rounding conventions, source categories may not add to the exact emission totals.
The on-road motor vehicles inventory category consists of trucks,
automobiles, buses, and motorcycles. California's model for estimating
emissions from on-road motor vehicles operating in California is
referred to as ``EMFAC'' (short for EMission FACtor). EMFAC has
undergone many revisions over the years. At the time the 2014 SIP
Update was submitted, EMFAC2011 was the model approved by the EPA for
estimating on-road motor source emissions in California.\16\ See 78 FR
14533 (March 6, 2013). Appendix D of the 2014 SIP Update contains the
latest on-road motor vehicle summer planning VOC and NOX
inventories, vehicle population, VMT and trips for each
[[Page 75769]]
EMFAC vehicle class category for the Coachella Valley. The motor
vehicle emissions in the Plan are based on CARB's EMFAC2011 emission
factor model and the latest planning assumptions from Southern
California Association of Government's (SCAG's) 2012-2035 Regional
Transportation Plan.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ EMFAC2011's approval is granted in 78 FR 14533. More
recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014 as the model for estimating on-
road emissions. That approval allowed the continued use of EMFAC2011
until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 77337.
\17\ SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan 2012-2035, including
Amendment #1 and #2 and the Air Quality Conformity Analysis. April
2012. Federal Highway Administration approval July 15, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2014 SIP Update contains off-road VOC and NOX
inventories developed by CARB using category-specific methods and
models.\18\ The off-road mobile source category includes aircraft,
trains, ships, and off-road vehicles and equipment used for
construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational
activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Detailed information on CARB's off-road motor vehicle
emissions inventory methodologies is found at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The stationary source category of the emissions inventory includes
non-mobile, fixed sources of air pollution comprised of individual
industrial, manufacturing, and commercial facilities. Examples of
stationary sources (a.k.a., point sources) include fuel combustion
(e.g., electric utilities), waste disposal (e.g., landfills), cleaning
and surface coatings (e.g., printing), petroleum production and
marketing, and industrial processes (e.g., chemical). Stationary source
operators report to the District the process and emissions data used to
calculate emissions from point sources. The District then enters the
information reported by emission sources into the California Emission
Inventory Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS) database.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The CEIDARS database consists of two categories of
information: source information and utility information. Source
information includes the basic inventory information generated and
collected on all point and area sources. Utility information
generally includes auxiliary data, which helps categorize and
further define the source information. Used together, CEIDARS is
capable of generating complex reports based on a multitude of
category and source selection criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The area sources category includes aggregated emissions data from
processes that are individually small and widespread or not well-
defined point sources. The area source subcategories include solvent
evaporation (e.g., consumer products and architectural coatings) and
miscellaneous processes (e.g., residential fuel combustion and farming
operations). Emissions from these sources are calculated from product
sales, population, employment data, and other parameters for a wide
range of activities that generate air pollution in the Coachella
Valley.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Detailed information on the area-wide source category
emissions is found on the CARB Web site: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The emission inventories in the 2014 SIP Update use the California
Emission Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM).\21\ The CEPAM model used in
the 2014 SIP Update is based on a 2008 baseline inventory developed
using the methods and databases described above (e.g., EMFAC2011;
CEIDARS; and CARB modular off-road equipment updates such as the 2011
In-Use Off-Road Equipment model, Transportation Refrigeration Units
model, and Cargo Handling Equipment model.). The inventory was
calibrated to 2008 emissions and activity levels, and inventories for
other years are back-cast (e.g., 2002) or forecast (e.g., 2018) using
CEPAM from that base inventory.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains the estimated
VOC and NOX stationary, area-wide and off-road forecast
summaries by Emission Inventory Code categories for the Coachella
Valley from CEPAM. A CEPAM inventory tool was created to support the
development of the 2012 PM2.5 SIPs due at that time. The
tool was designed to support all of the modeling, planning, and
reporting requirements due at that time and includes updates for all
the pollutants (e.g., NOX and VOC). Modeling results,
which are summarized in Appendix A, are available separately in
electronic file format.
\22\ 2014 SIP Update, page A-1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Proposed Action on the Emissions Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and the inventory methodologies used by the District and
CARB for consistency with CAA section 182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We
find that the base year and projected attainment year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories of actual and
projected emissions of NOX and VOC in the Coachella Valley
as of the date of the submittal. Accordingly, we propose to find that
these inventories provide an appropriate basis for the various other
elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, including the RACM, ROP,
RFP, and attainment demonstrations.
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
1. RACM Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provide
for the implementation of all reasonable available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
The RACM demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
The EPA has previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (``General Preamble'') \23\
and in a memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) Requirements and Attainment Demonstration Submissions
for the Ozone NAAQS,'' John Seitz, November 30, 1999 (Seitz memo).\24\
In summary, EPA guidance provides that to address the requirement to
adopt all RACM, states should consider all potentially reasonable
control measures for source categories in the nonattainment area to
determine whether they are reasonably available for implementation in
that area and whether they would, if implemented individually or
collectively, advance the area's attainment date by one year or
more.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See 57 FR 13498, 13560. The General Preamble describes the
EPA's preliminary view on how we would interpret various SIP
planning provisions in title I of the CAA as amended in 1990,
including those planning provisions applicable to the 1-hour ozone
standards. The EPA continues to rely on certain guidance in the
General Preamble to implement the 8-hour ozone standards under title
I.
\24\ Available at www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
\25\ See Seitz memo and General Preamble at 13560; see also
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for Proposed
Rulemaking on Approval of Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas,''
44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979) and Memorandum dated December 14, 2000,
from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, ``Additional Submission on RACM from States with Severe
One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements that are
not already either federally promulgated, part of the state's SIP, or
otherwise creditable in SIPs must be submitted in enforceable form as
part of a state's attainment plan for the area. CAA section 172(c)(6)
requires nonattainment plans to include enforceable emission
limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and
auctions of emission rights), as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for
attainment of such standards in such area by the applicable attainment
date. See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
The purpose of the RACM analysis is to determine whether or not
control measures exist that are economically and technically reasonable
and that provide emissions reductions that
[[Page 75770]]
would advance the attainment date for nonattainment areas. The EPA
defines RACM as any potential control measure for application to point,
area, on-road and non-road emission source categories that: (1) Is
technologically feasible; (2) is economically feasible; (3) does not
cause ``substantial widespread and long-term adverse impacts''; (4) is
not ``absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable''; and (5) can advance
the attainment date by at least one year. General Preamble at 13560.
For ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above, CAA
section 182(b)(2) also requires implementation of RACT for all major
sources of VOC and for each VOC source category for which the EPA has
issued a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document. CAA section
182(f) requires that RACT under section 182(b)(2) also apply to major
stationary sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major source
is a stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least
25 tons of VOC or NOX per year. CAA section 182(d). Under
the 8-hour ozone implementation rule, states were required to submit
SIP revisions meeting the RACT requirements of CAA sections 182(b)(2)
and 182(f) no later than 27 months after designation for the 8-hour
ozone standards (September 15, 2006, for areas designated in April
2004) and to implement the required RACT measures no later than 30
months after that submittal deadline. See 40 CFR 51.912(a). The EPA has
approved the RACT SIP for the SCAQMD for the 1997 ozone standards,
which included rules applicable to the Coachella Valley. See 73 FR
76947 (December 18, 2008).
2. Control Strategy and RACM Demonstration in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
a. The District's RACM Demonstration
Appendix VI of the 2007 AQMP includes a RACM demonstration covering
both the South Coast Air Basin and the Coachella Valley, which focuses
on control measures for stationary and area sources. The process to
identify RACM involved public meetings to solicit input, evaluation of
the EPA's suggested RACM, and evaluation of air emissions rules in
other areas (including the San Joaquin Valley, the San Francisco Bay
Area, Sacramento, Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth, the Houston-Galveston
area and the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium). The District also
reevaluated all 82 of its existing rules and regulations. The RACM
evaluation process included a summit where CARB technical experts,
local government representatives and the public suggested alternative
ways to attain air quality standards. More than 200 potential control
measures were identified. The District then screened the identified
measures and rejected those that would not individually or collectively
advance attainment in the area by at least one year, had already been
adopted as rules, or were in the process of being adopted. The
remaining measures were evaluated by taking into account baseline
inventories, available control technologies, and potential emission
reductions as well as whether the measure could be implemented on a
schedule that would advance attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards by at least a year.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 2007 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI-1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this analysis, SCAQMD scheduled 16 new or revised
stationary source control measures for development and adoption,
including revisions to make SCAQMD rules at least as stringent as other
California districts' rules and several innovative measures. Since
submission of the AQMP in 2007, the SCAQMD has adopted 12 of these
rules and submitted them to the EPA for approval into the SIP. Table 4
lists the measures identified in the 2007 AQMP,\27\ with citations to
the Federal Register notice that incorporates each measure into the
SIP, where applicable. These rules are part of the District's
enforceable commitment to achieve emissions reductions. However, the
District acknowledged that its commitment to adopt any given rule might
prove to be infeasible, meaning the control technology may not be
available or achievement of the emissions reductions may not be cost
effective. In adopting the 2007 AQMP, the SCAQMD Board committed to
``substitute any other measures as necessary to make up any emissions
reduction shortfall.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 2007 AQMP, Tables 4-1, 4-2A and 4-2B.
\28\ Attachment A of the 2007 AQMP, SCAQMD Board Resolution 07-
9, dated June 1, 2007.
Table 4--Status of RACM Rules Identified in SCAQMD 2007 AQMP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register
Ozone precursor notice adopting
Control measure Rule No. Title controlled rule into the
SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTS-01........... 1144........................ Metalworking fluids VOC................... 76 FR 70888, 11/
and direct-contact 16/2011.
lubricants.
CTS-04........... 1143........................ Consumer Paint VOC................... 76 FR 70888, 11/
Thinners and Multi- 16/2011.
Purpose Solvents.
CMB-01........... 1147........................ NOX reductions from NOX................... 75 FR 46845, 08/
miscellaneous 04/2010.
sources.
CMB-03........... 1111........................ Further NOX NOX................... 75 FR 46845, 08/
reductions from 04/2010.
space heaters.
FUG-02........... 461......................... Gasoline transfer and VOC................... 78 FR 21543, 04/
dispensing (VOC). 11/2013.
FUG-04........... 1149........................ Storage Tank and VOC................... 74 FR 67821, 12/
Pipeline Cleaning 21/2009.
and Degassing.
MCS-01........... 1110.2...................... Liquid and gaseous NOX and VOC........... 74 FR 18995,
fuels--stationary April 27, 2009.
ICEs (NOX and VOC).
MCS-01........... 1146........................ NOX from industrial, NOX................... 79 FR 57442, 09/
institutional, 25/2014.
commercial boilers,
steam generators,
and process heaters.
MCS-01........... 1146.1...................... NOX from small ind, NOX................... 79 FR 57442, 09/
inst, & commercial 25/2014.
boilers, steam gens,
and process heaters.
MCS-05........... 1127........................ Livestock waste (VOC) VOC................... 78 FR 30768, 05/
23/2013.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measures not yet adopted or not approved in the SIP by EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGM-01........... 2301........................ Emissions reductions NOX and VOC........... No rule
(proposed).................. from new or associated with
redevelopment this
projects (Indirect measure.\a\
Sources).
FLX-02........... n/a......................... Refinery pilot VOC................... No rule
program (VOC). associated with
this measure.
MOB-05........... Title 13 Cal. Code of AB923 LDV high NOX and VOC........... n/a.\b\
Regulations Sec. 2622. emitter program.
[[Page 75771]]
MOB-06........... Title 13 Cal. Code of AB923 MDV high NOX and VOC........... n/a.\b\
Regulations Sec. 2622. emitter program.
n/a.............. 2449........................ SOON program......... NOX................... (proposed
approval) 81 FR
12637, 03/10/
2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The District has not finalized Rule 2301.
\b\ SCAQMD implements this program through CARB's Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program.
n/a = not applicable.
The EPA determined that the 2007 AQMP met the RACM requirement for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR
12674 (March 1, 2012).\29\ CARB submitted a 2012 Air Quality Management
Plan (2012 AQMP), developed by the SCAQMD, in February 2013 with
additional information about the Coachella Valley, including data and
discussion on air quality, pollutant transport, emissions inventories,
attainment demonstration, and projections of future air quality.\30\
For the 2012 AQMP, the SCAQMD followed a process similar to that used
for the 2007 AQMP, which included public meetings to solicit input,
evaluation of EPA's suggested RACM, and evaluation of other air
agencies' regulations. See Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. The District
states in the 2012 AQMP that ``the 2007 AQMP adequately addressed and
satisfied the CAA planning requirements for ozone in the Coachella
Valley, and this chapter [Chapter 7: Current & Future Air Quality--
Desert Nonattainment Areas] is for information only.'' The 2012 AQMP
does, however, include a new RACM demonstration. See Appendix VI of the
2012 AQMP. It includes new and revised rules for the District since the
adoption of the 2007 AQMP. The EPA approved the RACM demonstration in
the 2012 AQMP as a revision to the SIP for both the 1-hour and 1997 8-
hour ozone standards for the South Coast Air Basin. See 79 FR 52526
(September 3, 2014). Many of the new rules have been incorporated into
the SIP,\31\ some have been proposed by the District but not
incorporated into the SIP,\32\ and others have yet to be proposed
locally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ More recently, the EPA determined that the South Coast
RECLAIM program did not meet RACM for PM2.5 because it
allowed facilities to delay installation of selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) to control NOX emissions. See 81 FR 22025
(April 14, 2016). Only two facilities in Coachella Valley are part
of the RECLAIM program and both facilities have an oxidation
catalyst and SCR on each gas turbine. The Title V Permits for these
facilities are included in the administrative record for this
action. Additionally, SCAQMD Rule 2005 requires all emissions
sources at any new or relocated RECLAIM facility to apply the best
available control technology.
\30\ Final Air Quality Management Plan, February 2013, South
Coast Air Quality Management District.
\31\ For example, CMB-03: Reductions from Commercial Space
Heating (Rule 1111) and FUG-02: Emission Reduction from LPG Transfer
and Dispensing--Phase II (Rule 1177).
\32\ For example, CMB-01: Further NOX Reductions from
RECLAIM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Local Jurisdiction RACM Demonstration
With respect to on-road mobile sources, we note that SCAG is the
designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for a large portion
of southern California, including Coachella Valley, and SCAG's
membership includes local jurisdictions within the Coachella Valley.
For the 2007 AQMP, SCAG evaluated a list of possible transportation
control measures (TCMs) as one element of the larger RACM evaluation
for the plan. TCMs are, in general, measures designed to reduce
emissions from on-road motor vehicles through reductions in VMT or
traffic congestion. SCAG's TCM development process is described in
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures'') of the 2007 AQMP, pages 49 to 55.
In our final action on the 2007 AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin,
we concluded that the evaluation processes undertaken by SCAG were
consistent with the EPA's RACM guidance and found that there were no
additional RACM, including no additional TCMs that would advance
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the South Coast Air
Basin. See 76 FR 57872, at 57883 (September 16, 2011) (proposed rule);
77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012) (final rule). More recently, we came to the
same conclusion with respect to RACM and TCMs for the South Coast in
our action on the ozone portion of the 2012 AQMP. See 79 FR 29712, at
29720 (May 23, 2014) (proposed rule); 79 FR 52526 (September 3, 2014)
(final rule).
While TCMs are being implemented in the upwind South Coast Air
Basin area to meet CAA requirements, neither the SCAQMD nor CARB rely
on implementation of any TCMs in the Coachella Valley to demonstrate
implementation of RACM in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The SCAQMD
and CARB justify the absence of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by
reference to the significant influence of pollutant transport from the
South Coast Air Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella Valley. We
agree that pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin is
significant, and find that, given the influence of such transport and
the minimal and diminishing emissions benefit generally associated with
TCMs, no TCM or combination of TCMs implemented in the Coachella Valley
would advance the attainment date in the Coachella Valley, and thus, no
TCMs are reasonably available for implementation in the Coachella
Valley for the purposes of meeting the RACM requirement. Lastly, we
note that, while not required for CAA purposes, SCAG's most recent
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)
(April 2016) includes a list of projects for the Coachella Valley, some
of which represent the types of projects often identified as TCMs, such
as traffic signalization projects and bike lane projects. See the
transportation system project list for Riverside County, attached as an
appendix to SCAG's 2016-2014 RTP/SCS (April 2016), available at https://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_ProjectList.pdf.
d. The State Strategy RACM Demonstration
CARB has primary responsibility for reducing emissions in
California from new and existing on-road and off-road engines and
vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer products. Given the need
for significant emissions reductions from mobile sources to meet the
ozone standards in California nonattainment areas, CARB has been a
leader in the development of stringent control measures for on-road and
off-road mobile sources, fuels and
[[Page 75772]]
consumer products. Because of this role, the 2007 AQMP identifies
CARB's 2007 State Strategy as a key component of the control strategy
necessary to attain the 1997 ozone standards. The 2007 State Strategy
includes measures to reduce emissions from multiple sectors, including
in-use heavy duty trucks, smog check improvements, reformulated
gasoline, cleaner off-road equipment, cleaner consumer products, ships,
harbor craft and port trucks. See 2007 State Strategy, Chapter 5.
CARB developed its 2007 State Strategy after an extensive public
consultation process to identify potential SIP measures. From this
process, CARB identified and committed to propose 15 new defined
measures. These measures focus on cleaning up the in-use fleet as well
as increasing the stringency of emissions standards for a number of
engine categories, fuels, and consumer products. Many, if not most, of
these measures have been adopted or are being proposed for adoption for
the first time anywhere in the nation. They build on CARB's already
comprehensive program described above that addresses emissions from all
types of mobile sources and consumer products, through both regulations
and incentive programs.
In adopting the 2007 State Strategy, CARB committed to reducing
Coachella Valley NOX emissions by 7 tons per day (tpd) and
VOC emissions by 2 tpd through the implementation of measures
identified in the 2007 State Strategy.\33\ However, this proposed
action does not rely on the NOX and VOC commitments in the
2007 State Strategy, because the 2014 SIP Update shows that the
Coachella Valley would meet the NOX and VOC attainment and
RFP goals, under existing rules received through September 2012.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Board Resolution 07-28, CARB, September 27, 2007, page 7,
Attachment B.
\34\ 2014 SIP Update, page A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB adopted the 2009 State Strategy Status Report in April 2009.
This submittal updated the 2007 State Strategy to reflect its
implementation during 2007 and 2008, and also to reflect changes
resulting from the adoption of the scoping plan mandated by Assembly
Bill 32 that will help reduce ozone during SIP implementation.\35\ The
update also changes assumptions about economic conditions and the
availability of incentive funds.\36\ Finally, the 2007 State Strategy
was revised to address approvability issues brought up by the EPA.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
\36\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
\37\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB again revised the state strategy in the 2011 State Strategy
Progress Report. While the changes primarily address attainment of the
1997 PM2.5 standards, the 2011 State Strategy Progress
Report also includes an appendix that updates the control measure
adoption schedule and revises the emissions estimates to reflect
changes made by CARB to the on-road truck and off-road equipment rules
in 2010.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 2011 State Strategy Progress Report at Appendix F
(``Revisions to 2007 P.M.2.5 and Ozone State
Implementation Plan for South Coast Air Basin and Coachella
Valley'') (March 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have previously determined that CARB's mobile source control
programs constituted RACM for the attainment plan for the 1997 Ozone
NAAQS in the South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012).
Since then, CARB has adopted additional mobile source control measures
including the Advanced Clean Cars program (also known as the Low
Emission Vehicle Program III or LEV-III), heavy-duty vehicle idling
rules, revisions to CARB's in-use rules for on-road and non-road diesel
vehicles, and emissions standards for non-road equipment, cargo
handling equipment, and recreational vehicles. See 81 FR 39424 (June
18, 2016).
3. The EPA's Evaluation of the Control Strategy and RACM
For the Coachella Valley in 2017 (the year prior to the attainment
year), the emissions inventory shows that nearly all of the locally
generated NOX emissions (93%) and nearly half of the VOC
emissions (48%) derive from mobile sources.\39\ Mobile source emissions
are well controlled throughout California because of stringent control
measures in place for on-road and off-road mobile sources and fuels.
See, e.g., 2007 State Strategy, p. 37. Additionally, as noted above,
the EPA has already determined CARB's rules in the 2007 State Strategy,
as revised in 2009 and 2011, meet RACM, and CARB continues to adopt new
and more stringent mobile source rules. In view of the transport of
pollutants into the Coachella Valley from the South Coast Air Basin
(see discussion at section I.B above) and the extensive control of
mobile sources by CARB, we propose to find that the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan provides for implementation of all RACM necessary to
demonstrate expeditious attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
in the Coachella Valley, consistent with the applicable requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Based on data from Tables A-1 and A-2 of the 2014 SIP
Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) requires states with ozone nonattainment
areas classified as ``Serious'' or above to submit plans that
demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the specified attainment date. For any
ozone nonattainment area classified as serious or above, section
182(c)(2)(A) of the CAA specifically requires the State to submit a
modeled attainment demonstration based on a photochemical grid modeling
evaluation or any other analytical method determined by the
Administrator to be at least as effective as photochemical modeling.
The attainment demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12).
For more detail on the requirements for modeling an 8-hour ozone
attainment demonstration, see the Technical Support Document (TSD) for
today's proposal. The modeling section of the TSD includes a complete
list of applicable modeling guidance documents. These documents
describe the components of the attainment demonstration, explain how
the modeling and other analyses should be conducted, and provide
overall guidance on the technical analyses for attainment
demonstrations.
As with any predictive tool, inherent uncertainties are associated
with photochemical grid modeling. The EPA's guidance recognizes these
limitations and provides recommended approaches for considering other
analytical evidence to help assess whether attainment of the NAAQS is
likely. This process is called a weight of evidence (WOE) analysis.
The EPA's modeling guidance (updated in 1996, 1999, and 2002)
discusses various WOE analyses. This guidance was updated again in 2005
and 2007 for the 1997 8-hour attainment demonstration procedures to
include a WOE analysis as an integral part of any attainment
demonstration. This guidance strongly recommends that all attainment
demonstrations include supplemental analyses beyond the recommended
modeling. These supplemental analyses can provide
[[Page 75773]]
additional information such as data analyses, and emissions and air
quality trends, which can help strengthen the conclusion based on the
photochemical grid modeling.
2. 8-Hour Attainment Demonstration Modeling and Weight of Evidence
Analysis in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
a. Photochemical Grid Modeling Attainment Demonstration Results
i. Photochemical Grid Model
The model selected for the 2007 AQMP attainment demonstrations is
the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx), version 4.4
(Environ, 2006), using Statewide Air Pollution Research Center-99
(SAPRC-99) gas phase mechanisms (Carter, 2000).\40\ The modeling system
(including the photochemical model, meteorological inputs, and chemical
mechanism) is consistent with the previous advice of outside peer
reviewers. CAMx is a state-of-the-art air quality model that can
simulate ozone and PM2.5 concentrations together in a ``one-
atmosphere'' approach for attainment demonstrations. CAMx is designed
to integrate the output from both prognostic and diagnostic
meteorological models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Carter, W.P.L., May 8, 2000a. Documentation of the SAPRC-99
chemical mechanism for VOC reactivity assessment. Report to the
California Air Resources Board, Contracts 92-329 and 95-308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. Episode Selection
Six meteorological episodes from three years are used as the basis
for the plan. An earlier modeling effort, contained in SCAQMD's 2003
Air Quality Management Plan, benefited from the intensive monitoring
conducted under the 1997 Southern California Ozone Study (SCOS 1997)
where the August 4-7, 1997, episode was the cornerstone of the modeling
analysis. One of the primary modeling episodes used in the earlier
modeling from August 5-6, 1997, was also selected for this plan. In
addition, five episodes that occurred during the Multiple Air Toxics
Exposure Study III (MATES-III) sampling program in 2004 (August 7-8)
and 2005 (May 21-22, July 15-19, August 4-6, and August 27-28) were
selected.\41\ The TSD for today's proposal provides further
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Final Report, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the
South Coast Air Basin (MATES-III), SCAQMD, September 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Model Performance
The modeling for the Coachella Valley attainment demonstration uses
the same approach used for the South Coast Air Basin attainment
demonstration, which was based on an air quality modeling domain that
covers the entire South Coast Air Basin, the Coachella Valley, and much
of southern California. Model performance was evaluated in three zones
in the South Coast Basin: The San Fernando Valley; the eastern San
Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino Valleys; and Los Angeles and
Orange County. Normalized Gross Bias, Normalized Gross Error, and Peak
Prediction Accuracy were determined for each area. Although not a
requirement for determining acceptable model performance, the
performance statistics were compared to the EPA performance goals
presented in guidance documents. The performance goals for Normalized
Gross Error and Peak Prediction Accuracy were met in the eastern San
Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino Valleys. In general, the
statistic for bias (Normalized Gross Bias) tends to be negative,
indicating that the model tends to slightly under-predict ozone. Based
on the analysis, the SCAQMD concludes that model performance is
acceptable for this application.
b. Modeling Approaches for the Coachella Valley Attainment
Demonstration
CAMx simulations were conducted for the base year 2002, and future-
year 2017 baseline and controlled emissions.\42\ The ozone attainment
demonstration relies on the use of site-specific relative response
factors (RRFs) being applied to the 2002 weighted design values. The
RRFs are determined from the future year controlled and the 2002 base
year simulations. The initial screening for station days to be included
in the attainment demonstration included the following criteria: (1)
Having an observed concentration equaling or exceeding 85 parts per
billion (ppb), and (2) a simulation predicted base year (1997, 2004 or
2005) concentration over 60 ppb. Additional criteria were added to the
selection process as the simulations were evaluated. A minimum of five
episode days are recommended to determine the site specific RRF. The
TSD for today's action has more information regarding the rationale for
our proposed approval of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Future year controlled emissions were estimated from the
baseline emissions using the CEPA control factors for the
simulations, are given in Table V-4-4 of the 2007 South Coast AQMP,
Appendix V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Results of Modeling
The attainment demonstration included in the 2007 AQMP indicates
that the Coachella Valley will attain the federal 1997 8-hour ozone
standards by the proposed attainment date of June 15, 2019. The 2007
AQMP projects the Coachella Valley air monitoring stations of Palm
Springs and Indio to have 8-hour ozone design values of 75.9 ppb and
66.2 ppb respectively in the year 2017.\43\ More recent modeling in the
2012 AQMP, as well as recent monitoring data, shows attainment by the
2018 attainment year. See the TSD for this action for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 2007 AQMP, Appendix V, page V-4-52, Table V-4-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Transport From the South Coast Air Basin
The South Coast Air Basin's continued progress toward meeting the
1997 ozone NAAQS is critical to the Coachella Valley's ability to
attain the 1997 ozone standards. The Coachella Valley is downwind of
the South Coast Air Basin, which is regulated by the SCAQMD. The 2007
AQMP states, ``pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin to
the Coachella Valley is the primary cause of its ozone nonattainment
status.'' The plan cites several studies that confirm the transport
between the two air basins.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See footnote 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Conclusions on the Modeling
Demonstration
We are proposing to approve an attainment date of June 15, 2019,
which reflects a 2018 attainment year. This is based on our evaluation
of the air quality modeling analyses in the 2007 AQMP and our WOE
analysis. The WOE analysis considered the attainment demonstration from
the 2012 AQMP and more recent ambient air quality monitoring data that
were not available at the time SCAQMD performed the attainment
modeling. The basis for our proposed approval is discussed in more
detail in the TSD. The modeling shows significant reductions in ozone
from the base period. The most recent ambient air quality data that we
have reviewed indicate that the area is on track to attain the 1997 8-
hour ozone standards by 2018.
Based on the analysis above and in the TSD, the EPA proposes to
find that the air quality modeling in the 2007 AQMP provides an
adequate basis for the RACM, RFP and attainment demonstrations in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, and is consistent with the applicable
requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(a) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(12).
[[Page 75774]]
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations
1. Rate of Progress
a. Requirements
For areas classified as moderate or above, Section 182(b)(1)
requires a SIP revision providing for rate of progress (ROP), defined
as a one time, 15% actual VOC emission reduction during the six years
following the baseline year 1990, or an average of 3% per year. For
areas designated serious nonattainment or above, no further action is
necessary if the area fulfilled its ROP requirement for the 1-hour
standards (from 1990-1996). As the EPA explained in the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule, 69 FR 23980 (October 27, 2004), for areas that did
not meet the 15% ROP reduction for the 1-hour ozone standards, a state
may notify the EPA that it wishes to rely on a previously submitted SIP
(for the 1-hour ozone standards), or it may elect to submit a new or
revised SIP (for the 1997 ozone standards) addressing the 15% ROP
reduction. The ROP demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
The CAA outlines and EPA guidance details the method for
calculating the requirements for the 1990-1996 period. Section
182(b)(1) requires that reductions: (1) Be in addition to those needed
to offset any growth in emissions between the base year and the
milestone year; (2) exclude emission reductions from four prescribed
federal programs (i.e., the federal motor vehicle control program, the
federal Reid vapor pressure (RVP) requirements, any RACT corrections
previously specified by the EPA, and any inspection and maintenance (I/
M) program corrections necessary to meet the basic I/M level); and (3)
be calculated from an ``adjusted'' baseline relative to the year for
which the reduction is applicable.
The adjusted base year inventory excludes the emission reductions
from fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996 and from federal RVP
regulations promulgated by November 15, 1990, or required under section
211(h) of the Act. The net effect of these adjustments is that states
are not able to take credit for emissions reductions that would result
from fleet turnover of current federal standard cars and trucks, or
from already existing federal fuel regulations. However, the SIP can
take full credit for the benefits of any new (i.e., post-1990) vehicle
emissions standards, as well as any other new federal or state motor
vehicle or fuel program that will be implemented in the nonattainment
area, including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new evaporative emissions
standards, reformulated gasoline, enhanced I/M, California low
emissions vehicle program, transportation control measures, etc.
While a SIP revision for attainment of the 1-hour ozone standards
was submitted for the Southeast Desert area (i.e., the Coachella Valley
and Western Mojave Desert areas), we have not approved the ROP plan for
the reduction of VOCs. We provided notice that the Southeast Desert has
attained the 1-hour standards on April 15, 2015. See 80 FR 20166 (April
15, 2015). Per 40 CFR 51.1118, the RFP requirement (including the 15%
ROP requirement for VOCs) no longer applies to the 1-hour ozone
standards for the Southeast Desert area. Although the ROP provision is
a one-time requirement, it remains in effect for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. Therefore, the Coachella Valley SIP must demonstrate a 15%
ROP for VOC reductions by 2008, from the 2002 baseline.
b. ROP Demonstration in the State Submittal
The 2014 SIP Update incorporates the ROP demonstration as an
element of the RFP demonstration. We note that this approach is valid,
but different from the organization of this notice, where we first, and
separately, assess the ROP demonstration and then assess the RFP
demonstration. See section IV.D.2 for the RFP assessment. VOC emissions
from the RFP tables for the Coachella Valley (see Table C-1 in the 2014
SIP Update), were used to create Table 5 below. The revised 15% ROP VOC
demonstration uses a 2002 average summer weekday emissions inventory as
the base year inventory and addresses 2002-2008. Based on the progress
of the VOC emissions reductions from 2002 to 2008, the State concluded
the Coachella Valley met the ROP requirement for the 15% VOC reduction.
Table 5--15% Rate-of-Progress Demonstration for VOC Emissions in the
Coachella Valley a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coachella
VOC Emissions (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 2002 baseline inventory.............................. 22.7
2. 2008 remaining emissions............................. 17.6
3. 2008 goal (remaining emissions after 15% ROP 19.3
Reduction required from 2002 baseline).................
4. ROP reduction achieved by 2008 (Compare Line 2 to Yes
Line 7)................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Table C-1.
2. Reasonable Further Progress
a. Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) require plans for
nonattainment areas to provide for RFP. RFP is defined in section
171(1) as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the
relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may reasonably
be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment
of the applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.'' CAA section
182(c)(2)(B) requires ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious
or higher to submit no later than 3 years after designation for the 8-
hour ozone standards an RFP SIP providing for an average of 3% per year
of VOC and/or NOX emissions reductions for (1) the 6-year
period immediately following the baseline year; and (2) all remaining
3-year periods after the first 6-year period out to the area's
attainment date. The RFP requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for the substitution of
NOX emission reductions in place of VOC reductions to meet
the RFP requirements. According to the EPA's NOX
Substitution Guidance,\45\ the substitution of NOX
reductions for VOC reductions must be done on a percentage basis,
rather than a straight ton-for-ton exchange. There are two steps for
substituting NOX for VOC. First, an equivalency
demonstration
[[Page 75775]]
must show that the cumulative RFP emission reductions are consistent
with the NOX and VOC emission reductions determined in the
ozone attainment modeling demonstration. Second, specified reductions
in NOX and VOC emissions should be accomplished in the
interim period between the 2002 base year and the attainment date,
consistent with the continuous RFP emission reduction requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
``NOX Substitution Guidance,'' December 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. RFP Demonstration in the State Submittal
The 2014 SIP Update contains emissions estimates for the baseline,
milestone and attainment years, and additional discussion of the RFP
demonstration. See page 5 and Table C-1 in Appendix C. Table 6 below
shows data from the RFP demonstration, with additional rows based on
information provided by CARB. The 2014 SIP Update uses NOX
substitution beginning in milestone year 2014 to meet VOC emission
targets. For the Coachella Valley, the State concluded that RFP
demonstration meets the applicable requirements for each milestone year
as well as the attainment year.
Table 6--Calculation of RFP Demonstrations for Coachella Valley a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emission calculations (tpd) 2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 2002 Baseline VOC.................................... 22.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments............... n/a 1.1 1.5 1.8 1.9 2.0
3. RACT Corrections..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0
4. Adjusted 2002 baseline VOC inventory (2002 Baseline n/a 21.6 21.2 20.9 20.8 20.7
VOC-Line 2-Line 3).....................................
5. RFP Commitment for VOC reductions from new measures.. n/a 0 0 0 0 0
6. Future Year VOC with existing and proposed measures.. n/a 17.6 15.0 15.8 15.8 15.9
7. Required VOC % change since previous milestone year, n/a 15% 9% 9% 9% 3%
relative to 2002.......................................
8. Required VOC reduction from 2002 adjusted baseline... n/a 15% 24% 33% 42% 45%
9. Target VOC Levels \b\................................ n/a 18.4 16.4 14.7 13.3 12.8
10. Apparent VOC Shortfall (Line 6-Line 9).............. n/a -0.8 -1.3 1.2 2.6 3.2
11. Apparent % VOC shortfall (Line 10 / Line 4.......... n/a -3.7% -6.4% 5.6% 12.7% 15.3%
12. VOC shortfall previously provided by NOX n/a 0 0 0 5.6% 12.7%
substitution % (Line 13 of prior milestone year, or 0
if negative)...........................................
13. Actual VOC shortfall (Line 11-Line 12).............. n/a -3.7% -6.4% 5.6% 7.1% 2.5%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emission calculations (tpd) 2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Baseline NOX inventory.............................. 43.3 31.0 23.8 \c\ 22.0 \c\ 18.9 \c\ 17.8
16. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments.............. n/a 1.6 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.3
17. Adjusted 2002 baseline NOX inventory (Line 15 2002 n/a 41.7 41.3 41.1 41.0 40.9
baseline-Line 16)......................................
18. RFP commitment for NOX reductions from new measures. n/a 0 0 0 0 0
19. Calculated NOX creditable reductions since 2002 n/a 41.7 41.3 41.1 41.0 40.9
(Line 17-Line 18)......................................
20. Change in NOX since 2002 (Line 19-Line 15).......... n/a 10.6 17.5 19.1 22.1 23.1
21. Calculated % NOX reductions since 2002 (Line 20 / n/a 25.6% 42.3% 46.5% 53.9% 56.5%
Line 19)...............................................
22. NOX previously used for VOC shortfall by NOX n/a 0 0 0 5.6% 12.7%
substitution % (from Line 12)..........................
23. NOX substitution needed for VOC shortfall % (Same as n/a 0.0% 0.0% 5.6% 7.1% 2.5%
Line 13, or 0 if Line 9 < 0)...........................
24. Forecasted % NOX reduction surplus (Line 21-Line 22- n/a 25.6% 42.3% 40.9% 41.2% 41.3%
Line 23)...............................................
25. RFP achieved?....................................... n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Table C-1.
\b\ Target VOC levels for 2008 = (1-Line 8) x (Line 4). In subsequent years, Target VOC = [(prior year Line 9 + prior year Line 2-current year line 2) x
(1-current year line 7)].
\c\ Estimated emissions include an additional 1 tpd safety margin for transportation conformity budget.
Note: Because of rounding conventions, values in table may not reflect the exact calculated quantity from the underlying numbers.
[[Page 75776]]
3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP Demonstrations
Based on our review of the ROP calculations in the 2014 SIP Update,
summarized in Table 5 above, we conclude that the state has
demonstrated that sufficient emission reductions have been achieved to
meet the ROP requirements in 2008. And as shown in Table 6, the South
Coast 2007 8-hour Ozone SIP provides for RFP in each milestone year,
consistent with applicable CAA requirements and EPA guidance. We
therefore propose to approve the ROP and RFP demonstrations under
sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1)
and 51.1100(o)(4).
E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
CAA section 176(c) requires federal actions in nonattainment and
maintenance areas to conform to the goals of SIPs. This means that such
actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute to violations of a NAAQS, (2)
worsen the severity of an existing violation, or (3) delay timely
attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone.
Actions that involve Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to
the EPA's transportation conformity rule, which is codified in 40 CFR
part 93, subpart A. Under this rule, metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate
with state and local air quality and transportation agencies, the EPA,
FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that an area's RTP and transportation
improvement programs (TIP) conform to the applicable SIP. This
demonstration is typically done by showing that estimated emissions
from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or budgets)
contained in the SIP. An attainment, RFP, or maintenance SIP
establishes MVEBs for the attainment year, each required RFP year or
last year of the maintenance plan, as appropriate. MVEBs are generally
established for specific years and specific pollutants or precursors.
Ozone attainment and RFP plans establish MVEBs for NOX and
VOC. See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
Before an MPO may use MVEBs in a submitted SIP, the EPA must first
either determine that the MVEBs are adequate or approve the MVEBs. In
order for us to find the MVEBs adequate and approvable, the submittal
must meet the conformity adequacy requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
and (5) and be approvable under all pertinent SIP requirements. To meet
these requirements, the MVEBs must be consistent with the approvable
attainment and RFP demonstrations and reflect all of the motor vehicle
control measures contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations.
See 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more information on the
transportation conformity requirements and applicable policies on
MVEBs, please visit our transportation conformity Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation.
The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of
four basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP
submission; (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the
MVEB during a public comment period and responding to any comments that
are submitted; (3) reviewing the submitted SIP to determine if it meets
the adequacy criteria; and, (4) making a finding of adequacy or
inadequacy. See 40 CFR 93.118.
2. MVEBs in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
The 2007 AQMP did not propose budgets for transportation conformity
for the Coachella Valley. CARB submitted the 2008 Early Progress Plan,
an amendment to the SIP, to establish MVEBs for many areas of
California including the Coachella Valley.\46\ Using EMFAC2007 (the
2007 version of the EMissions FACtor model), CARB set the 2012 MVEBs at
7 tpd for VOCs and 26 tpd for NOX. We found the MVEB in the
2008 Early Progress Plan for the Coachella Valley to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes.\47\ See 73 FR 25694 (April 16,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress Toward
Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality Standards for Ozone and
Setting Transportation Conformity Budgets for Ventura County,
Antelope Valley--Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, Eastern
Kern County, Imperial County, Revised: February 27, 2008, Release
Date: February 27, 2008.
\47\ Letter dated April 16, 2008 from Deborah Jordan to James
Goldstene, California Air Resources Board, RE: Adequacy Status of
Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2014 SIP Update includes updated MVEBs.\48\ As noted in Section
IV.B.2 of this notice, the MVEBs were estimated using EMFAC2011, and
the latest planning assumptions from SCAG, including Amendment No. 1 to
the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan and Amendment No. 13-4 to
the Federal Transportation Improvement Program.\49\ The emissions
estimate also includes off-model adjustments to EMFAC2011 to account
for the Advanced Clean Car regulations adopted by CARB and included in
the SIP. See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 2014 SIP Update, Table D-1.
\49\ See https://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/Amendment-1.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MVEBs are the projected on-road mobile source VOC and
NOX emissions in the Coachella Valley for baseline,
milestone and attainment years. These budgets, shown in Table 7,
include a 1 tpd safety margin, as allowed by the conformity rule. See
40 CFR 93.124(a).
Table 7--Coachella Valley Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the 2014 SIP Update
[tpd, average summer weekday] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2017 2018 2014 2017 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Road Inventory....................................... 14.79 11.39 10.74 3.72 3.07 2.93
Safety Margin........................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1
MVEBs \b\............................................... 16 13 12 5 5 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix D, Table D-1.
\b\ Rounded up to the nearest ton.
[[Page 75777]]
3. Proposed Action on the Budgets
As part of our review of the budgets' approvability, we have
evaluated the revised budgets using our adequacy criteria in 40 CFR
93.318(e)(4) and (5). We found that the 2017 and 2018 budgets meet each
adequacy criterion. We have completed our review of the 2014 SIP Update
and are proposing to approve the SIP's attainment and RFP
demonstrations. We have also reviewed the proposed budgets submitted
with the 2014 SIP Update and have found that the 2017 and 2018 budgets
are consistent with the attainment and RFP demonstrations, were based
on control measures that have already been adopted and implemented, and
meet all other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements
including the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5).
Therefore, we are proposing to approve the 2017 and 2018 budgets as
shown in Table 7.\50\ Once these budgets are found adequate or are
approved, the budgets for the 2008 early progress plan for 2012 will no
longer be used in transportation conformity determinations. If
finalized as proposed, the U.S. Department of Transportation and SCAG
(the metropolitan planning organization for the area) would be required
to use the new budgets in transportation conformity determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Although the 2014 SIP Update contained MVEBs for 2014,
2017, and 2018, MVEBs for 2014 are no longer relevant for conformity
analyses since that year has passed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions Offset Demonstration
1. Requirements for a VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a state with areas classified as
``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' to ``submit a revision that identifies and
adopts specific enforceable transportation control strategies (TCSs)
and TCMs to offset any growth in emissions from growth in VMT or
numbers of vehicle trips in such area.'' Herein, we refer to the SIP
requirement as the ``VMT emissions offset requirement,'' and the SIP
revision intended to demonstrate compliance with the VMT emissions
offset requirement as the ``VMT emissions offset demonstration.'' The
VMT emissions offset requirement is a continuing applicable requirement
for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding rules that
apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(10).
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also includes two additional elements
requiring that the SIP include: (1) TCSs and TCMs as necessary to
provide (along with other measures) the reductions needed to meet the
applicable RFP requirement, and (2) include strategies and measures to
the extent needed to demonstrate attainment. As noted above, the first
element of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires that areas classified as
``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' submit a SIP revision that identifies and
adopts TCSs and TCMs sufficient to offset any growth in emissions from
growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips.
In response to the Court's decision in Association of Irritated
Residents v. EPA,\51\ we issued a memorandum titled Guidance on
Implementing Clean Air Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control
Measures and Transportation Control Strategies to Offset Growth in
Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled (August 2012
Guidance).\52\ The August 2012 Guidance discusses the meaning of the
terms TCSs and TCMs, and recommends that both TCSs and TCMs be included
in the calculations made for the purpose of determining the degree to
which any hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT should
be offset. Generally, TCS is a broad term that encompasses many types
of controls including, for example, motor vehicle emission limitations,
I/M programs, alternative fuel programs, other technology-based
measures, and TCMs, that would fit within the regulatory definition of
``control strategy.'' See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n). TCM is defined at 40
CFR 51.100(r) to mean ``any measure that is directed toward reducing
emissions of air pollutants from transportation sources,'' including,
but not limited to, measures listed in CAA section 108(f), and
generally refers to programs intended to reduce the VMT, the number of
vehicle trips, or traffic congestion, such as programs for improved
public transit, designation of certain lanes for passenger buses and
high-occupancy vehicles, trip reduction ordinances, and similar
measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ 632 F.3d. 584, at 596-597 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted as
amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 668, further amended February
13, 2012 (ruling additional TCMs are required whenever vehicle
emissions are projected to be higher than they would have been had
VMT not increased, even when aggregate vehicle emissions are
actually decreasing).
\52\ Memorandum dated August 30 2012 from Karl Simon, Director,
Transportation and Climate Division, Office of Transportation and
Air Quality, to Carl Edlund, Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, EPA Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The August 2012 guidance also explains how states may demonstrate
that the VMT emissions offset requirement is satisfied in conformance
with the Court's ruling. It recommends states estimate emissions for
the nonattainment area's base year and the attainment year. One
emission inventory is developed for the base year, and three different
emissions inventory scenarios are developed for the attainment year.
Two of these scenarios would represent hypothetical emissions scenarios
that would provide the basis to identify the ``growth in emissions''
due solely to the growth in VMT, and one that would represent projected
actual motor vehicle emissions after fully accounting for projected VMT
growth and offsetting emissions reductions obtained by all creditable
TCSs and TCMs. The August 2012 guidance contains specific details on
how states might conduct the calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions inventory should be based on
VMT in that year and it should reflect all enforceable TCSs and TCMs in
place in the base year. This would include vehicle emissions standards,
state and local control programs such as I/M programs or fuel rules,
and any additional implemented TCSs and TCMs that were already required
by or credited in the SIP as of the base year.
The first of the emissions calculations for the attainment year
would be based on the projected VMT and trips for that year, and assume
that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited in the base year
inventory have been put in place since the base year. This calculation
demonstrates how emissions would hypothetically change if no new TCSs
or TCMs were implemented, and VMT and trips were allowed to grow at the
projected rate from the base year. This estimate would show the
potential for an increase in emissions due solely to growth in VMT and
trips, representing a no-action scenario. Emissions in the attainment
year in this scenario may be lower than those in the base year due to
fleet turnover to lower-emitting vehicles. Emissions may also be higher
if VMT and/or vehicle trips are projected to sufficiently increase in
the attainment year.
The second of the attainment year emissions calculations would also
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited have been
put in place since the base year, but would also assume no growth in
VMT and trips between the base year and attainment year. Like the no-
action attainment year estimate described above, emissions in the
attainment year may be lower than those in the base year due to fleet
turnover, but the emissions would not be influenced by any growth
[[Page 75778]]
in VMT or trips. This emissions estimate, the VMT offset ceiling
scenario, would reflect the maximum attainment emissions that should be
allowed to occur under the statute as interpreted by the Court because
it shows what would happen under a scenario in which no offsetting TCSs
or TCMs have yet been put in place and VMT and trips are held constant
during the period from the area's base year to its attainment year.
These two hypothetical status quo estimates are necessary steps in
identifying target emission levels. These levels determine whether
further TCMs or TCSs beyond those that have been adopted and
implemented are needed to fully offset any increase in emissions due
solely to VMT and vehicle trips identified in the no action scenario.
The third calculation incorporates the emissions that are actually
expected to occur in the area's attainment year after taking into
account reductions from all enforceable TCSs and TCMs that in reality
were put in place after the baseline year. This estimate would be based
on the VMT and trip levels expected to occur in the attainment year
(i.e., the VMT and trip levels from the first estimate) and all of the
TCSs and TCMs expected to be in place and for which the SIP will take
credit in the area's attainment year, including any TCMs and TCSs put
in place since the base year. This represents the projected actual
(attainment year) scenario. If this emissions estimate is less than or
equal to the emissions ceiling that was established in the second of
the attainment year calculations, the TCSs or TCMs for the attainment
year would be sufficient to fully offset the identified hypothetical
growth in emissions.
If the projected actual attainment year emissions are greater than
the VMT offset ceiling established in the second of the attainment year
emissions calculations even after accounting for post-baseline year
TCSs and TCMs, the state would need to adopt and implement additional
TCSs or TCMs. To meet the VMT offset requirement of section
182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by the Court, the additional TCSs or TCMs
would need to offset the growth in emissions and bring the actual
emissions down to at least the same level as the attainment year VMT
offset ceiling estimate.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
The Coachella Valley VMT Offset demonstration is contained in
Appendix E of the 2014 SIP Update. The State used EMFAC2011,\53\ an
EPA-approved motor vehicle emissions model for California, to estimate
on-road emissions. The model calculates emissions from two combustion
processes (i.e., running exhaust and start exhaust) and four
evaporative processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses, diurnal losses,
and resting losses). It combines trip-based VMT data from the regional
transportation planning agencies (i.e., SCAG), starts data based on
household travel surveys, and vehicle population data from the
California Department of Motor Vehicles. These sets of data are
combined with corresponding emission rates to calculate emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ More recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014 as the model for
estimating on-road emissions; however, that approval allowed the
continued use of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 77337.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions from running exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak, and
running losses are a function of how much a vehicle is driven. As such,
emissions from these processes are directly related to VMT and vehicle
trips, and the State included emissions from them in the calculations
that provide the basis for the revised Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstration. The 2014 SIP Update (see page E-3) did not
include emissions from resting loss and diurnal loss processes in the
analysis because such emissions are related to vehicle population,
rather than VMT or vehicle trips, and thus are not part of ``any growth
in emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled or numbers of
vehicle trips in such area'' (emphasis added) under CAA section
182(d)(1)(A).
The VMT emissions offset demonstration also includes the previously
described three different attainment year scenarios (i.e., no action,
VMT offset ceiling, and projected actual) for 2018. The State's
selection of 2018 is appropriate given that the 2014 SIP Update
demonstrates attainment by the applicable attainment date of June 15,
2019 based on the 2018 controlled emissions inventory. Table 8
summarizes the emissions estimate for the base year and the three
scenarios discussed in Section IV.G.1.b.
Table 8--VMT Emissions Offset Inventory Scenarios and Results for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VMT Starts Controls VOC Emissions
Scenario -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1000 miles/day Year 1000/day Year tpd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Year............................................... 2002 10,293 2002 1,248 2002 8
No Action............................................... 2018 14,329 2018 10,640 2002 4
VMT Offset Ceiling...................................... 2002 14,329 2002 7,935 2002 3
Projected Actual........................................ 2018 64,709 2018 10,640 2018 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix E.
For the base year scenario, CARB ran the EMFAC2011 model for the
2002 base year using VMT and starts data corresponding to those years.
As shown in Table 8, the 2014 SIP Update estimates Coachella Valley VOC
emissions to be 8 tpd in 2002.
For the no-action scenario, the State first identified the on-road
motor vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs or TCMs) put in place since
the base year and incorporated into EMFAC2011. Then, CARB ran EMFAC2011
with the VMT and starts data corresponding to the applicable attainment
year (i.e., 2018 for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards) without the
emissions reductions from the on-road motor vehicle control programs
put in place after the base year. Thus, the no action scenario reflects
the hypothetical VOC
[[Page 75779]]
emissions that would occur in the attainment year in the nonattainment
area if CARB had not put in place any additional TCSs or TCMs after
2002. As shown in Table 8, CARB estimates no action VOC emissions for
Coachella Valley to be 4 tpd in 2018.
For the VMT offset ceiling scenario, the State ran the EMFAC2011
model for the attainment year but with VMT and starts data
corresponding to base year values. Like the no- action scenario, the
EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to reflect VOC emissions levels in the
attainment year without the benefits of the on-road motor vehicle
control programs implemented after the base year. Thus, the VMT offset
ceiling scenario reflects hypothetical VOC emissions if the State had
not put in place any TCSs or TCMs after the base year and if there had
been no growth in VMT or vehicle trips between the base year and the
attainment year. As shown in Table 8, CARB estimates VMT offset ceiling
VOC emissions to be 3 tpd in 2018.
The hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips
can be determined from the difference between the VOC emissions
estimates under the no action scenario and the corresponding estimate
for the VMT offset ceiling scenario. Based on the values in Table 9,
the hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips in
the Coachella Valley would have been 1 tpd (i.e., 4 tpd minus 3 tpd)
for the purposes of the revised VMT emissions offset demonstration for
the 8-hour ozone standards. This hypothetical difference establishes
the level of emissions caused by growth in VMT that need to be offset
by the combination of post-baseline year TCMs and TCSs and any
necessary additional TCMs and TCSs.
For the projected actual scenario calculation, the State included
the emissions benefits from TCSs and TCMs \54\ put in place since the
base year. The most significant State on-road and fuels measures
providing reductions during the 2002 to 2018 timeframe and relied upon
for the VMT emissions offset demonstration include Low Emission
Vehicles II and Zero Emissions Vehicle standards, California
Reformulated Gasoline Phase 3, and Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks.
Some of these measures were adopted prior to 2002, but all or part of
the implementation occurred after 2002.\55\ State measures adopted
since 2007, as part of the 2009 State Strategy Status Report, and the
associated reductions are also described in the IV.B.2.d of this
notice. The 2014 SIP Update provides a list of CARB rules for mobile
sources, since 1990 through the plan's development, in Table E-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ The 2014 SIP Update states, ``there are no TCMs in the SIP
for the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert because upwind
emissions from the South Coast Air Basin and Ventura County largely
influence air quality in both the Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert. TCMs have been implemented by the SCAG in those
upwind areas.'' (Appendix E, p. E-3)
\55\ Appendix E of the SIP Update contains a full list of the
TCSs adopted by the state since 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation of the VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset demonstrations
established 2002 as the base year for the purpose of the VMT emissions
offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. The base year
for VMT emissions offset demonstration purposes should generally be the
same base year used for nonattainment planning purposes. In today's
action, the EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year inventory
for Coachella Valley for the purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. Thus, CARB's selection of 2002 as the base year for the VMT
emissions offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards is
appropriate.
As shown in Table 8, the results from these calculations establish
projected actual attainment-year VOC emissions of 2 tpd in the
Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour standards demonstration. By
comparing these values against the corresponding VMT offset ceiling
value, we can determine whether additional TCMs or TCSs would need to
be adopted and implemented to offset any increase in emissions due
solely to VMT and trips. Because the projected actual emissions are
less than the corresponding VMT offset ceiling emissions, the State's
demonstration shows compliance with the VMT emissions offset
requirement. This means that the adopted TCSs and TCMs are sufficient
to offset the growth in emissions from the growth in VMT and vehicle
trips in Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Taking
into account the creditable post-baseline year TCMs and TCSs, the
demonstration shows Coachella Valley offset hypothetical growth in
emissions due to growth in VMT by 2 tpd of VOC, which is more than the
required 1 tpd offset.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ The offsetting VOC emissions reductions from the TCSs and
TCMs put in place after the base year can be determined by
subtracting the ``projected actual'' emissions estimates from the
``no action'' emissions estimates in table 8. For the purposes of
the 8-hour ozone demonstration, the offsetting emissions reductions,
2 tpd (4 tpd minus 2 tpd), exceed the growth in emissions from
growth in VMT and vehicle trips (1 tpd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the 2014 SIP Update, we find the State's
analysis to be acceptable and agree that the State has adopted
sufficient TCSs and TCMs to offset the growth in emissions from growth
in VMT and vehicle trips in the Coachella Valley for the purposes of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus we find that the VMT emissions
offset demonstration for this area complies with the VMT emissions
offset requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A), consistent with 40 CFR
40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). Therefore, we propose approval
of the revised VMT emissions offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards, contained in the 2014 SIP Update, as a revision to the
California SIP.
V. The EPA's Proposed Actions
A. The EPA's Proposed Approvals
For the reasons discussed above, the EPA is proposing to approve
the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
Plan includes the relevant portions of the following documents: (1)
``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast Air Quality
Management District, June 2007; (2) CARB's ``2007 State Strategy for
the California State Implementation Plan,'' Release Date April 26, 2007
and Appendices A-G, Release Date May 7, 2007; (3) CARB's ``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,'' Release Date: March 24, 2009; (4) CARB's
``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,'' Release Date March 29, 2011;
and (5) CARB's ``Staff Report, Proposed Updates to the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standard, State Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert,'' Release Date: September 22, 2014.
The EPA is proposing to approve the following elements of the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan under CAA section 110(k)(3):
1. The RACM demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17);
2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(4);
3. The attainment demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12);
[[Page 75780]]
4. 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) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
We are also approving the revised MVEBs for RFP 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
sections 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
B. Request for Public Comments
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document or on other relevant matters. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days. We will consider
these comments before taking final action.
VI. 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 and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
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: October 19, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-26376 Filed 10-31-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P