Determination of Attainment and Approval of Base Year Emissions Inventories for the Imperial County, California Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area, 13392-13398 [2017-04780]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
13392
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). We
notified local tribes of our proposed
approval and held two tribal
consultations during the comment
period.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by May 12, 2017.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 13, 2017.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(483) introductory
text and by adding paragraph (c)(483)(ii)
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan—in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(483) The following plan was
submitted on June 9, 2016, by the
Governor’s designee. * * *
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution
Control District (GBUAPCD).
(1) ‘‘2016 Owens Valley Planning
Area PM10 State Implementation Plan,’’
adopted April 13, 2016, excluding all of
the following: Section 10.1 (‘‘Proposed
Rule 433’’); Appendix I–1 (‘‘2006
Settlement Agreement’’); Appendix II–1
(‘‘2014 Stipulated Judgement’’);
Appendices D (‘‘2008 GBUAPCD Board
Order No. 080128–01’’), E (‘‘2013
GBUAPCD Board Order No. 130916–
01’’), and F (‘‘GBUAPCD Fugitive Dust
Rules (400, 401, 402)’’) of Appendix V–
1 (‘‘Owens Valley Planning Area 2016
State Implementation Plan BACM
Assessment); Appendix VI–2 (‘‘Owens
Lake Dust Mitigation Program Phase 9/
10 Project—Final Environmental Impact
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Report (May 2015)’’); and Appendix X–
1 (‘‘Proposed Rule 433’’).
[FR Doc. 2017–04804 Filed 3–10–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0772; FRL–9958–21–
Region 9]
Determination of Attainment and
Approval of Base Year Emissions
Inventories for the Imperial County,
California Fine Particulate Matter
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is determining that the
Imperial County, California Moderate
nonattainment area (‘‘the Imperial
County NA’’) has attained the 2006 24hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS or ‘‘standard’’). This
determination, also known as a clean
data determination (CDD), is based upon
complete, quality-assured, and certified
ambient air monitoring data showing
that the area has monitored attainment
of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based
on the 2013–2015 data available in the
EPA’s Air Quality System database. As
a consequence of this determination of
attainment, certain Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements that apply to the Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District
(ICAPCD or ‘‘District’’) shall be
suspended for so long as the area
continues to meet the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. The area remains
nonattainment for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is also
approving a revision to California’s state
implementation plan (SIP) consisting of
the 2008 emissions inventory for the
Imperial County NA submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB
or ‘‘State’’) on January 9, 2015. This
action is being taken under the CAA.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, we are proposing approval and
soliciting written comment on these
actions. If we receive adverse comments
on this direct final rule that result in
withdrawal of the entire rule or any
part(s) of it, we will address those
comments when we finalize the
proposal. The EPA does not plan to
institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
This rule is effective on May 12,
2017 without further notice, unless the
EPA receives adverse comments by
April 12, 2017. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2016–0772, at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Vagenas.Ginger@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
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 EPA’s full public comment
policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415–
972–3964, Vagenas.Ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ mean EPA.
DATES:
Table of Contents
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Background for the EPA’s Proposed Action
II. Clean Data Determination
III. Analysis of Emissions Inventories
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for the EPA’s Proposed
Action
On July 18, 1997, the EPA established
NAAQS for particles less than or equal
to 2.5 micrometers (mm) in diameter
(PM2.5), including an annual standard of
15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/
m3) based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24hour (daily) standard of 65 mg/m3 based
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
on a 3-year average of 98th percentile
24-hour PM2.5 concentrations.1 Effective
December 18, 2006, the EPA revised the
PM2.5 standard by lowering the level of
the 24-hour PM2.5 standard to 35 mg/m3
(‘‘2006 PM2.5 standard’’) but retained the
annual standard at 15 mg/m3.2 3
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required
under CAA section 107(d) to designate
areas throughout the nation as attaining
or not attaining the NAAQS. On January
5, 2005, the EPA published initial air
quality designations for the 1997 annual
and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.4 We
designated Imperial County as
‘‘Unclassifiable/Attainment’’ for both
the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
standards under subpart 1 of the CAA.
We subsequently designated a portion of
Imperial County as nonattainment
under subpart 1 of the CAA for the 2006
24-hour standard effective December 13,
2009 (74 FR 58688, November 13,
2009).5
On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), in
response to a decision by the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia, the EPA published a final
rule classifying all areas then designated
nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006
PM2.5 standards as ‘‘Moderate’’ under
subpart 4 and establishing a deadline of
December 31, 2014 for states to submit
any attainment-related SIP elements
required for these areas pursuant to
subpart 4.6 The EPA provided its
1 62
FR 36852 (July 18, 1997) and 40 CFR 50.7.
FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
3 Effective March 18, 2013, the EPA strengthened
the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the
level to 12.0 mg/m3 while retaining the secondary
annual PM2.5 NAAQS at the level of 15.0 mg/m3. 78
FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) and 40 CFR 50.18.
4 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
5 In 2015, the EPA designated a portion of
Imperial County nonattainment for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The CDD that is the subject of this
direct final rule pertains only to the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard. The area remains nonattainment for
the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard. See 80 FR 2206
(January 15, 2015).
6 In April 2007, the EPA issued an
implementation rule to assist states with the
development of SIP submissions to meet attainment
planning requirements of the 1997 standards (the
‘‘2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule’’). 72 FR 20583
(April 25, 2007). The EPA premised the 2007 PM2.5
Implementation Rule on its interpretation that
nonattainment areas for the PM2.5 standards were
subject solely to the general nonattainment plan
requirements of subpart 1, part D of title 1 of the
CAA (‘‘subpart 1’’). On January 4, 2013, the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in a
challenge to our 2007 PM2.5 implementation rule.
See NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
In NRDC, the court held that the EPA erred in
implementing the 1997 PM2.5 standard pursuant
only to the general implementation requirements of
subpart 1, rather than also to the implementation
requirements specific to particulate matter in
subpart 4, part D of title 1 of the CAA (‘‘subpart 4’’).
The court remanded the rule and instructed the
EPA ‘‘to repromulgate these rules pursuant to
2 71
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13393
rationale for these actions in both the
proposed and final classification/
deadline rule.7
Under EPA’s longstanding Clean Data
Policy, EPA may issue a determination
of attainment after notice and comment
rulemaking determining that a specific
area is attaining the relevant standard.8 9
The effect of a CDD is to suspend the
requirement for the area to submit an
attainment demonstration, reasonably
available control measures (RACM), a
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan,
contingency measures, and any other
planning requirements related to
attainment for as long as the area
continues to attain the standard.
The EPA issued the Fine Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements on July 29, 2016 (effective
October 24, 2016).10 In that rule, the
EPA reaffirmed the Clean Data Policy at
40 CFR 51.1015, as follows:
Upon a determination by EPA that a
moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area has
attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirements
for the state to submit an attainment
demonstration, provisions demonstrating that
reasonably available control measures
(including reasonably available control
technology for stationary sources) shall be
implemented no later than 4 years following
the date of designation of the area, reasonable
further progress plan, quantitative milestones
and quantitative milestone reports, and
contingency measures for the area shall be
suspended until such time as: (1) The area is
redesignated to attainment, after which such
requirements are permanently discharged; or,
(2) EPA determines that the area has reviolated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time the
state shall submit such attainment plan
elements for the moderate nonattainment
area by a future date to be determined by
EPA and announced through publication in
the Federal Register at the time EPA
determines the area is violating the PM2.5
NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.1015.
A CDD does not suspend the
requirements for an emissions inventory
or new source review.11
Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.’’ This
reasoning applies to all PM2.5 standards.
7 See 78 FR 69806, 69809 (November 21, 2013)
and 79 FR 31566, 31568 (June 2, 2014).
8 ‘‘Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National
Ambient Air Quality Standards,’’ Memorandum
from Stephen D. Page, December 14, 2004.
9 In a separate action mandated by CAA section
188(b)(2), the EPA has proposed to determine that
Imperial County attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard by the applicable attainment deadline of
December 31, 2015. See 81 FR 91088 (December 16,
2016). A determination that an area has attained by
the applicable attainment date does not constitute
a redesignation to attainment.
10 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).
11 On December 8, 2016, the EPA proposed action
on three rules that update the ICAPCD’s NSR
program. Specifically, we have proposed to fully
approve Rules 204 (Applications) and 206
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
Continued
13MRR1
13394
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
II. Clean Data Determination
A. Criteria for Determining Attainment
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part
50, section 50.18 and in accordance
with appendix N, the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard is met when the design
value is less than or equal to 35 mg/m3
(based on the rounding convention in 40
CFR part 50, appendix N) at each
eligible monitoring site within the
area.12 Data completeness requirements
for a given year are met when at least
75 percent of the scheduled sampling
days for each quarter have valid data. A
determination of whether an area’s air
quality currently meets the PM2.5
NAAQS is generally based upon the
most recent three years of complete,
quality-assured data gathered at
established State and Local Air
Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in a
nonattainment area and entered into the
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS)
database.13 Data from ambient air
monitors operated by state/local
agencies in compliance with the EPA
monitoring requirements must be
submitted to AQS. Monitoring agencies
annually certify that these data are
accurate to the best of their knowledge.
Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily
on data in AQS when determining the
attainment status of areas.14
B. Monitoring Network and Data
Considerations
The State and the District are the
governmental agencies with the
authority and responsibility under state
law for collecting ambient air quality
data within the Imperial County NA.
Annually, CARB and the ICAPCD
submit monitoring network plans to the
EPA. These plans discuss the status of
the air monitoring network as required
under 40 CFR part 58. The EPA reviews
these annual network plans for
compliance with the applicable
reporting requirements in 40 CFR 58.10.
With respect to PM2.5, we have found
that the annual network plans submitted
by CARB and the ICAPCD meet the
applicable requirements under 40 CFR
part 58.15 Furthermore, we concluded in
our Technical System Audit Report of
CARB’s and ICAPCD’s ambient air
quality monitoring program that the
ambient air monitoring network
currently meets or exceeds the
requirements for the minimum number
of monitoring sites designated as
SLAMS for PM2.5 in the Imperial County
NA.16 CARB annually certifies that the
data it submits to AQS are qualityassured.17
During the 2013–2015 period, CARB
and ICAPCD operated three SLAMS
within the Imperial County NA; all
three sites are located in the southern
portion of Imperial County. The
Calexico-Ethel monitoring site is
operated by CARB and is located
approximately 0.7 miles north of the
United States-Mexico border. The
Calexico-Ethel monitoring site is the
design value site for PM2.5 and the only
violating SLAMS in Imperial County.
ICAPCD operates two additional
SLAMS: the Brawley monitoring site,
located in the City of Brawley, 9 miles
north of the border, and the El Centro
monitoring site, located in the City of El
Centro, 22 miles north of the border.
For the purposes of this proposed
action, we reviewed the data for the
most recent three-year period (2013–
2015) for completeness and determined
that the data collected by CARB and the
ICAPCD meet the completeness
criterion for all 12 quarters at PM2.5
monitoring sites in the Imperial County
NA.18
C. Evaluation of Current Attainment
The EPA’s evaluation of whether the
Imperial County NA has attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is based on
our review of the monitoring data and
takes into account the adequacy of the
PM2.5 monitoring network in the
nonattainment area and the reliability of
the data collected by the network, as
previously discussed.
Table 1 shows the 24-hour PM2.5
design values at each of the three
monitoring sites within the Imperial
County NA for the most recent threeyear period (2013–2015).
TABLE 1—2013–2015 24-HOUR PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR THE IMPERIAL COUNTY NA
98th percentile
(μg/m3)
Site
(AQS ID)
Local site name
2013
Calexico Ethel ..................................................................................
El Centro ..........................................................................................
Brawley ............................................................................................
06–025–0005
06–025–1003
06–025–0007
2014
27.4
19.0
17.2
36.3
19.6
19.9
2015
34.6
14.1
12.4
2013–2015
24-hour
design values
(μg/m3)
33
18
17
Source: EPA, Design Value Report, December 2, 2016.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
The data show that the 24-hour design
value for the 2013–2015 period was
equal to or less than 35 mg/m3 at all
monitors. Therefore, we are proposing
to determine, based on complete,
quality-assured, and certified data for
2013–2015, that the Imperial County NA
has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard. Preliminary data available in
AQS for 2016 (January through August)
indicate that the area continues to attain
the standard and are consistent with the
(Processing of Applications), and proposed a
limited approval/limited disapproval of Rule 207
(New and Modified Stationary Source Review). We
expect this proposed action to be published in the
Federal Register in the near future. Today’s action
includes our proposed approval of the emissions
inventories included in the attainment plan for the
Imperial County NA submitted on January 9, 2015.
See Section III below.
12 The 24-hour PM
2.5 standard design value is the
3-year average of annual 98th percentile 24-hour
average values recorded at each eligible monitoring
site, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is met
when the 24-hour standard design value at each
monitoring site is less than or equal to 35 mg/m3.
13 AQS is the EPA’s repository of ambient air
quality data.
14 See 40 CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, appendix L;
40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58, and 40 CFR part
58, appendices A, C, D, and E.
15 See, e.g., letter from Meredith Kurpius,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA
Region IX, to Brad Poiriez, Air Pollution Control
Officer, ICAPCD, dated October 24, 2014.
16 See, e.g., letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, Acting
Director, Air Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, to
Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, dated
August 31, 2016.
17 See, e.g., letter from Ravi Ramalingam, Chief,
Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment
Branch, CARB, to Elizabeth Adams, Director, Air
Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, dated May 10, 2016.
18 The EPA notes that CARB and ICAPCD did not
start daily sampling until 2014; however, daily
sampling was not required under the monitoring
regulations that applied at the time. Further, a
separate calculation based on daily sampling data
collected in 2013 at a collocated non-regulatory
monitor yields a 98th percentile value for 2013
similar to that of the primary regulatory monitor.
See memorandum from Michael Flagg, U.S. EPA,
Region IX, Air Quality Analysis Office,
‘‘Implementation of PM2.5 sampling frequency
requirements in Imperial County,’’ November 1,
2016. This memorandum is included in the
rulemaking docket for this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
determination of attainment. Additional
preliminary data available on CARB’s
real-time Web site for September
through December are also consistent
with attainment.19
III. Analysis of Emissions Inventories
A. California’s SIP Submittal for the
2006 PM2.5 Standard for the Imperial
County NA
Today’s action also concerns the
emissions inventories included in the
‘‘Imperial County 2013 State
Implementation Plan for the 2006 24Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment
Area’’ (‘‘2013 PM2.5 Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’)
adopted by the District on December 2,
2014 and submitted to the EPA as a SIP
revision on January 9, 2015.20
B. Public Notice, Public Hearing, and
Completeness Requirements for SIP
Submittals
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and
110(l) require each state to provide
reasonable public notice and
opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submission of a SIP or
SIP revision to the EPA. To meet this
requirement, every SIP submission
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.
Both the District and the State
satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable
public notice and hearing prior to
adoption and submission of the 2013
PM2.5 Plan. The District provided a
public comment period and held a
public hearing prior to the adoption of
the SIP submission on December 2,
2014.21 CARB provided the required
public notice and opportunity for public
comment prior to its December 18, 2014
public hearing and adoption of the SIP
19 CARB’s real-time AQMIS (Air Quality and
Meteorological Information System) database can be
found at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/
aqmis2.php. AQMIS provides a combination of
preliminary real-time data and historical regulatory
data.
20 As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, our clean data
determination for the Imperial County NA suspends
requirements to submit an attainment
demonstration, associated RACM, RFP plan,
contingency measures, and other SIP revisions
related to the attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, but does not suspend the requirement for
an inventory. Therefore, in conjunction with our
clean data determination for the Imperial County
NA, we are also approving the 2008 base year
inventories submitted with the 2013 PM2.5 Plan.
21 ICAPCD, ‘‘Notice of Public Hearing for
Adoption of Imperial County 2013 State
Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5
Moderate Nonattainment Area,’’ published October
24, 2014 and November 2, 2014.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
submission.22 The submission includes
proof of publication of notices for the
respective public hearings. We find,
therefore, that the 2013 PM2.5 Plan
meets the procedural requirements for
public notice and hearing in CAA
sections 110(a) and 110(l).
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the
EPA to determine whether a SIP
submission 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 become
complete by operation of law six
months after the date of submission.
The EPA’s SIP completeness criteria are
found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.
The January 9, 2015 SIP submission
became complete by operation of law on
July 9, 2015.
C. Requirements for Emissions
Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that
each SIP include a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual
emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant or pollutants in the
area. By requiring an accounting of
actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutants in the area, this
section ensures that the base year
inventory will include all emissions that
contribute to the formation of a
particular NAAQS pollutant. For the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, this
includes directly emitted PM2.5 (referred
to as primary or direct PM2.5) as well as
the main chemical precursors to the
formation of secondary PM2.5: Nitrogen
oxides (NOX), sulfur oxides (SOx),
volatile organic compounds (VOC), and
ammonia (NH3). Primary PM2.5 includes
condensable and filterable particulate
matter.
A state should include in its SIP
submittal documentation explaining
how the emissions data were calculated.
In estimating mobile source emissions,
a state should use the latest emissions
models and planning assumptions
available at the time the SIP is
developed. At the time the 2013 PM2.5
Plan was developed, California was
required to use the model EMFAC2011
to estimate tailpipe and brake and tire
wear emissions of PM2.5, NOX, SOx, and
VOC from on-road mobile sources (78
FR 14533, March 6, 2013). States are
required to use the EPA’s AP–42 road
22 CARB, ‘‘Notice of Public Meeting to Consider
Approval of the Imperial County 2013 State
Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5
Moderate Nonattainment Area,’’ November 18,
2014; and CARB Board Resolution 14–43, ‘‘Imperial
County 2013 State Implementation Plan for the
2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment
Area,’’ December 18, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13395
dust method for calculating re-entrained
road dust emissions from paved roads
(76 FR 6328, February 4, 2011).
D. Emissions Inventories in the 2013
PM2.5 Plan
The annual average planning
inventories for direct PM2.5 and all
PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SOx, VOC, and
ammonia) for the Imperial County PM2.5
NA, together with documentation for
the inventories, are found in Chapter 3
of the 2013 PM2.5 Plan. CARB and the
District worked together to develop a
complete inventory for all sources in
Imperial County using activity
information and emission factors.
Activity data may come from national
survey data or reports (e.g., from the
United States Department of Agriculture
Economic Research Service) or local
sources such as the Southern California
Gas Company, paint suppliers, and
District databases. Emission factors can
be based on a number of variables
including source tests, compliance
reports, and the EPA’s AP–42.
CARB provided annual average and
winter daily average inventories for
2008, which it designated as the base
year for the 2006 PM2.5 Plan. CARB
included both annual average and
winter daily average inventories because
a majority of the exceedances addressed
by the 2013 PM2.5 Plan occurred in the
winter (November through April). Each
inventory includes emissions from
point, area, on-road, and non-road
sources. Stationary sources include
point and area sources. Point sources in
the Imperial County air basin that emit
10 tons per year or more of VOC, NOX,
SOx, or PM2.5 report annual emissions to
the District.
The District and CARB develop an
annual emissions inventory for all
sources in Imperial County, including
separate inventories for winter and
summer and an annual average
inventory. Point source emissions for
the 2008 base year emission inventories
were based on this information. Area
sources include smaller emissions
sources distributed across the
nonattainment area. Many small point
sources and facilities that are not
inventoried individually are estimated
as a group and are included in the area
source category.
The source categories that generate
the most emissions (unpaved roads and
tilling and harvesting operations) reflect
implementation of PM10 Best Available
Control Measures (BACM) approved
rules. Agricultural burning is regulated
under both ICAPCD’s EPA-approved
Rule 701 and its CARB-approved Smoke
Management Plan.
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
13396
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
The on-road mobile inventories use
EMFAC2011 for estimating motor
vehicle emissions.23 EMFAC2011
calculates emission rates from all motor
vehicles that operate on highways,
freeways, and local roads in California.
EMFAC2011 uses California Department
of Motor Vehicle registration data for
the number of vehicles, the Southern
California Association of Governments
travel demand output model for the
number of vehicle miles traveled, and
California Bureau of Automotive Repair
for odometer readings and for emission
factors derived from vehicle
surveillance programs and
dynamometer readings.
Off-road emissions such as
construction, aircraft (military,
commercial, and civil), gardening
equipment, agricultural equipment, and
recreational vehicle emissions were
calculated using CARB’s 2011 Off-Road
Model.24 The off-road model uses
source population, activity, and
emission estimates for all off-road
vehicles, including boats, outdoor
recreational vehicles, industrial and
construction equipment, farm
equipment, lawn and garden equipment,
aircraft, and trains.
A summary of the Plan’s 2008 winter
and annual base year inventories is
provided in Table 2 below. For a more
detailed discussion of the inventories,
see the 2013 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 3.
TABLE 2—PM2.5 EMISSIONS INVENTORY BY SOURCE CATEGORY, WINTER AND ANNUAL PLANNING EMISSIONS
INVENTORIES
[tpd (tons per day)]
Winter
average
2008
Source category
Direct PM2.5
Stationary Sources ...............................................................................................................................................
Area-Wide Sources ..............................................................................................................................................
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles ............................................................................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft ...........................................................................................................................................................
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational Boats, and Farm Equipment ......................................................................
Annual
average
2008
0.508
10.933
0.302
0.301
0.759
0.277
0.760
0.322
Total Direct PM2.5 ......................................................................................................................................
Nitrogen Oxides
Stationary Sources ...............................................................................................................................................
Area-Wide Sources ..............................................................................................................................................
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles ............................................................................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft ...........................................................................................................................................................
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational Boats, and Farm Equipment ......................................................................
12.619
12.824
1.836
0.423
1.875
0.462
8.608
8.425
1.523
6.053
1.524
6.502
Total Nitrogen Oxides ...............................................................................................................................
Volatile Organic Compounds
Stationary Sources ...............................................................................................................................................
Area-Wide Sources ..............................................................................................................................................
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles ............................................................................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft ...........................................................................................................................................................
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational Boats, and Farm Equipment ......................................................................
18.443
18.788
1.059
7.639
1.071
9.069
1.996
2.072
2.186
2.657
2.189
3.624
Total Volatile Organic Compounds ...........................................................................................................
Sulfur Oxides
Stationary Sources ...............................................................................................................................................
Area-Wide Sources ..............................................................................................................................................
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles ............................................................................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft ...........................................................................................................................................................
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational Boats and Farm Equipment .......................................................................
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
0.495
10.786
15.537
18.025
0.079
0.058
0.081
0.068
0.015
0.015
0.204
0.026
0.205
0.026
Total Sulfur Oxides ....................................................................................................................................
Ammonia
Stationary Sources ...............................................................................................................................................
Area-Wide Sources ..............................................................................................................................................
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles ............................................................................................................................................
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft ...........................................................................................................................................................
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational Boats and Farm Equipment .......................................................................
0.382
0.395
3.142
27.622
3.100
31.693
0.166
0.166
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.002
30.932
34.961
Total Ammonia ..........................................................................................................................................
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 3, Tables 3.1, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, and 3.10.
23 2013
PM2.5 Plan, p. 21–22.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
24 Id.
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
E. EPA’s Evaluation and Final Action
The inventories in the 2013 PM2.5
Plan are based on the most current and
accurate information available to the
State and District at the time the Plan
and its inventories were being
developed, including the latest EPAapproved version of California’s mobile
source emissions model, EMFAC2011,
and the EPA’s most recent AP–42
methodology for paved road dust. The
inventories comprehensively address all
source categories in the Imperial County
NA and were developed consistent with
the EPA’s inventory guidance. For these
reasons, we are approving the 2013
PM2.5 Plan’s annual average and winter
daily average inventories for 2008 as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(3).
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Final Action
The EPA is determining that the
Imperial County NA has attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As
provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, this clean
data determination suspends the
requirements for this area to submit an
attainment demonstration, associated
RACM, RFP plan, contingency
measures, and any other planning SIP
revisions related to the attainment of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, so long as
this area continues to meet the standard.
This clean data determination does not
constitute a redesignation to attainment.
The Imperial County NA will remain
designated nonattainment for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS until such time
as the EPA determines, pursuant to
sections 107 and 175A of the CAA, that
the Imperial County NA meets the CAA
requirements for redesignation to
attainment, including an approved
maintenance plan showing that the area
will continue to meet the standard for
10 years. We are also approving the
2013 PM2.5 Plan’s annual average and
winter daily average inventories for
2008 as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(3).
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA is fully approving the
submitted base year emissions inventory
because we believe it fulfills all relevant
requirements. We do not think anyone
will object to this inventory approval or
the CDD, so we are finalizing them
without proposing in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section
of this issue of the Federal Register, we
are simultaneously proposing to make a
CDD and proposing approval of the
same submitted emissions inventory. If
we receive adverse comments by April
12, 2017, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that some or all of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
Jkt 241001
provisions of the direct final approval
will not take effect and we will address
the comments in a subsequent final
action based on the proposal. If we do
not receive timely adverse comments,
the direct final approval will be
effective without further notice on May
12, 2017.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action makes a clean data
determination based on air quality and
suspends certain federal requirements,
and thus, does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. In addition, under the Clean
Air Act, the Administrator is required to
approve a SIP submission that complies
with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C.
7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s
role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves State
law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. For these reasons, this
proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13397
• does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: January 3, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(484) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan—in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(484) The following plan was
submitted on January 9, 2015, by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Imperial County Air Pollution
Control District.
(1) ‘‘Imperial County 2013 State
Implementation Plan for the 2006 24Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment
Area,’’ adopted December 2, 2014,
Chapter 3 (‘‘Emissions Inventory’’)
excluding: Section 3.4.1
(‘‘Determination of Significant Sources
of PM2.5 Precursors’’); the 2011 and 2012
winter and annual average inventories
in Table 3.1 (‘‘PM2.5 Emissions
Inventory by Major Source Category
2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
13398
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 47 / Monday, March 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Planning Emissions Inventories’’); the
2011 and 2012 winter and annual
average inventories in Table 3.7 (‘‘NOX
Emissions Inventory by Major Source
Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter
and Annual Planning Emissions
Inventories’’); the 2011 and 2012 winter
and annual average inventories in Table
3.8 (‘‘VOCs Emissions Inventory by
Major Source Category 2008, 2011 and
2012 Winter and Annual Planning
Emissions Inventories’’); the 2011 and
2012 winter and annual average
inventories in Table 3.9 (‘‘SOX
Emissions Inventory by Major Source
Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter
and Annual Planning Emissions
Inventories’’); and the 2011 and 2012
winter and annual average inventories
in Table 3.10 (‘‘Ammonia Emissions
Inventory by Major Source Category
2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual
Planning Emissions Inventories’’).
■ 3. Section 52.247 is amended by
adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
§ 52.247 Control strategy and regulations:
Fine Particle Matter.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Determination of attainment.
Effective May 12, 2017, EPA has
determined that, based on 2013 to 2015
ambient air quality data, the Imperial
County PM2.5 nonattainment area has
attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. Under the provisions of EPA’s
PM2.5 implementation rule (see 40 CFR
51.1015), this determination suspends
the requirements for this area to submit
an attainment demonstration, associated
reasonably available control measures, a
reasonable further progress plan,
Local agency
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0245; FRL–9958–43–
Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan
Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality
Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano
Air Quality Management District
(YSAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and
particulate matter (PM) from confined
animal facilities (CAFs). We are
approving a local rule that regulates
these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act).
SUMMARY:
11.2
The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0245. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly-available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publiclyavailable only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On December 1, 2016 (81 FR 86662),
the EPA proposed to approve the
following rule into the California SIP.
Adopted
Confined Animal Facilities Permit Program ........................................................
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
The EPA’s proposed action provided
a 30-day public comment period. During
this period, we received no comments.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted.
Therefore, as authorized in section
110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
approving this rule into the California
SIP.
14:45 Mar 10, 2017
This rule will be effective on
April 12, 2017.
DATES:
Rule title
We proposed to approve this rule
because we determined that it complied
with the relevant CAA requirements.
Our proposed action contains more
information on the rule and our
evaluation.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
[FR Doc. 2017–04780 Filed 3–10–17; 8:45 am]
Rule No.
YSAQMD ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
contingency measures, and other
planning SIPs related to attainment for
as long as this area continues to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. If EPA
determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, that this area no longer
meets the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,
the corresponding determination of
attainment for that area shall be
withdrawn.
Jkt 241001
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the
YSAQMD rule described in the
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region IX Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
06/14/06
Submitted
10/05/06
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
E:\FR\FM\13MRR1.SGM
13MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 47 (Monday, March 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13392-13398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04780]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0772; FRL-9958-21-Region 9]
Determination of Attainment and Approval of Base Year Emissions
Inventories for the Imperial County, California Fine Particulate Matter
Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is determining that
the Imperial County, California Moderate nonattainment area (``the
Imperial County NA'') has attained the 2006 24-hour fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS
or ``standard''). This determination, also known as a clean data
determination (CDD), is based upon complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the area has
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based
on the 2013-2015 data available in the EPA's Air Quality System
database. As a consequence of this determination of attainment, certain
Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements that apply to the Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District (ICAPCD or ``District'') shall be suspended
for so long as the area continues to meet the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. The area remains nonattainment for the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is also approving a revision to
California's state implementation plan (SIP) consisting of the 2008
emissions inventory for the Imperial County NA submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB or ``State'') on January 9, 2015.
This action is being taken under the CAA. Elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register, we are proposing approval and soliciting written
comment on these actions. If we receive adverse comments on this direct
final rule that result in withdrawal of the entire rule or any part(s)
of it, we will address those comments when we finalize the proposal.
The EPA does not plan to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
[[Page 13393]]
DATES: This rule is effective on May 12, 2017 without further notice,
unless the EPA receives adverse comments by April 12, 2017. If we
receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2016-0772, at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Vagenas.Ginger@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 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
EPA's full 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415-
972-3964, Vagenas.Ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background for the EPA's Proposed Action
II. Clean Data Determination
III. Analysis of Emissions Inventories
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for the EPA's Proposed Action
On July 18, 1997, the EPA established NAAQS for particles less than
or equal to 2.5 micrometers ([mu]m) in diameter (PM2.5),
including an annual standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and a 24-hour (daily) standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based
on a 3-year average of 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5
concentrations.\1\ Effective December 18, 2006, the EPA revised the
PM2.5 standard by lowering the level of the 24-hour
PM2.5 standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ (``2006 PM2.5
standard'') but retained the annual standard at 15 [mu]g/
m\3\.2 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997) and 40 CFR 50.7.
\2\ 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
\3\ Effective March 18, 2013, the EPA strengthened the primary
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the level to 12.0 [mu]g/
m\3\ while retaining the secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS at
the level of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) and 40
CFR 50.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required under CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the
nation as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On January 5, 2005, the
EPA published initial air quality designations for the 1997 annual and
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.\4\ We designated Imperial County as
``Unclassifiable/Attainment'' for both the 1997 annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 standards under subpart 1 of the CAA. We subsequently
designated a portion of Imperial County as nonattainment under subpart
1 of the CAA for the 2006 24-hour standard effective December 13, 2009
(74 FR 58688, November 13, 2009).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
\5\ In 2015, the EPA designated a portion of Imperial County
nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The CDD
that is the subject of this direct final rule pertains only to the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard. The area remains
nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard. See 80
FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), in response to a decision by the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the EPA
published a final rule classifying all areas then designated
nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006 PM2.5 standards as
``Moderate'' under subpart 4 and establishing a deadline of December
31, 2014 for states to submit any attainment-related SIP elements
required for these areas pursuant to subpart 4.\6\ The EPA provided its
rationale for these actions in both the proposed and final
classification/deadline rule.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In April 2007, the EPA issued an implementation rule to
assist states with the development of SIP submissions to meet
attainment planning requirements of the 1997 standards (the ``2007
PM2.5 Implementation Rule''). 72 FR 20583 (April 25,
2007). The EPA premised the 2007 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule on its interpretation that nonattainment areas for the
PM2.5 standards were subject solely to the general
nonattainment plan requirements of subpart 1, part D of title 1 of
the CAA (``subpart 1''). On January 4, 2013, the D.C. Circuit Court
of Appeals issued its decision in a challenge to our 2007
PM2.5 implementation rule. See NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428
(D.C. Cir. 2013). In NRDC, the court held that the EPA erred in
implementing the 1997 PM2.5 standard pursuant only to the
general implementation requirements of subpart 1, rather than also
to the implementation requirements specific to particulate matter in
subpart 4, part D of title 1 of the CAA (``subpart 4''). The court
remanded the rule and instructed the EPA ``to repromulgate these
rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.'' This
reasoning applies to all PM2.5 standards.
\7\ See 78 FR 69806, 69809 (November 21, 2013) and 79 FR 31566,
31568 (June 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPA's longstanding Clean Data Policy, EPA may issue a
determination of attainment after notice and comment rulemaking
determining that a specific area is attaining the relevant
standard.8 9 The effect of a CDD is to suspend the
requirement for the area to submit an attainment demonstration,
reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further
progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures, and any other planning
requirements related to attainment for as long as the area continues to
attain the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient
Air Quality Standards,'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, December
14, 2004.
\9\ In a separate action mandated by CAA section 188(b)(2), the
EPA has proposed to determine that Imperial County attained the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 standard by the applicable attainment
deadline of December 31, 2015. See 81 FR 91088 (December 16, 2016).
A determination that an area has attained by the applicable
attainment date does not constitute a redesignation to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA issued the Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements on July 29,
2016 (effective October 24, 2016).\10\ In that rule, the EPA reaffirmed
the Clean Data Policy at 40 CFR 51.1015, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).
Upon a determination by EPA that a moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area has attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the
requirements for the state to submit an attainment demonstration,
provisions demonstrating that reasonably available control measures
(including reasonably available control technology for stationary
sources) shall be implemented no later than 4 years following the
date of designation of the area, reasonable further progress plan,
quantitative milestones and quantitative milestone reports, and
contingency measures for the area shall be suspended until such time
as: (1) The area is redesignated to attainment, after which such
requirements are permanently discharged; or, (2) EPA determines that
the area has re-violated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time
the state shall submit such attainment plan elements for the
moderate nonattainment area by a future date to be determined by EPA
and announced through publication in the Federal Register at the
time EPA determines the area is violating the PM2.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.1015.
A CDD does not suspend the requirements for an emissions inventory
or new source review.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ On December 8, 2016, the EPA proposed action on three rules
that update the ICAPCD's NSR program. Specifically, we have proposed
to fully approve Rules 204 (Applications) and 206 (Processing of
Applications), and proposed a limited approval/limited disapproval
of Rule 207 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review). We expect
this proposed action to be published in the Federal Register in the
near future. Today's action includes our proposed approval of the
emissions inventories included in the attainment plan for the
Imperial County NA submitted on January 9, 2015. See Section III
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13394]]
II. Clean Data Determination
A. Criteria for Determining Attainment
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 50, section 50.18 and in
accordance with appendix N, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard
is met when the design value is less than or equal to 35 [mu]g/m\3\
(based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N) at
each eligible monitoring site within the area.\12\ Data completeness
requirements for a given year are met when at least 75 percent of the
scheduled sampling days for each quarter have valid data. A
determination of whether an area's air quality currently meets the
PM2.5 NAAQS is generally based upon the most recent three
years of complete, quality-assured data gathered at established State
and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in a nonattainment area and
entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.\13\ Data from
ambient air monitors operated by state/local agencies in compliance
with the EPA monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS.
Monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are accurate to
the best of their knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on
data in AQS when determining the attainment status of areas.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The 24-hour PM2.5 standard design value is the
3-year average of annual 98th percentile 24-hour average values
recorded at each eligible monitoring site, and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS is met when the 24-hour standard design value
at each monitoring site is less than or equal to 35 [mu]g/m\3\.
\13\ AQS is the EPA's repository of ambient air quality data.
\14\ See 40 CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, appendix L; 40 CFR part
53; 40 CFR part 58, and 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C, D, and E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Monitoring Network and Data Considerations
The State and the District are the governmental agencies with the
authority and responsibility under state law for collecting ambient air
quality data within the Imperial County NA. Annually, CARB and the
ICAPCD submit monitoring network plans to the EPA. These plans discuss
the status of the air monitoring network as required under 40 CFR part
58. The EPA reviews these annual network plans for compliance with the
applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR 58.10. With respect to
PM2.5, we have found that the annual network plans submitted
by CARB and the ICAPCD meet the applicable requirements under 40 CFR
part 58.\15\ Furthermore, we concluded in our Technical System Audit
Report of CARB's and ICAPCD's ambient air quality monitoring program
that the ambient air monitoring network currently meets or exceeds the
requirements for the minimum number of monitoring sites designated as
SLAMS for PM2.5 in the Imperial County NA.\16\ CARB annually
certifies that the data it submits to AQS are quality-assured.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See, e.g., letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Brad Poiriez, Air
Pollution Control Officer, ICAPCD, dated October 24, 2014.
\16\ See, e.g., letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, Acting Director,
Air Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, dated August 31, 2016.
\17\ See, e.g., letter from Ravi Ramalingam, Chief, Consumer
Products and Air Quality Assessment Branch, CARB, to Elizabeth
Adams, Director, Air Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, dated May 10,
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the 2013-2015 period, CARB and ICAPCD operated three SLAMS
within the Imperial County NA; all three sites are located in the
southern portion of Imperial County. The Calexico-Ethel monitoring site
is operated by CARB and is located approximately 0.7 miles north of the
United States-Mexico border. The Calexico-Ethel monitoring site is the
design value site for PM2.5 and the only violating SLAMS in
Imperial County. ICAPCD operates two additional SLAMS: the Brawley
monitoring site, located in the City of Brawley, 9 miles north of the
border, and the El Centro monitoring site, located in the City of El
Centro, 22 miles north of the border.
For the purposes of this proposed action, we reviewed the data for
the most recent three-year period (2013-2015) for completeness and
determined that the data collected by CARB and the ICAPCD meet the
completeness criterion for all 12 quarters at PM2.5
monitoring sites in the Imperial County NA.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The EPA notes that CARB and ICAPCD did not start daily
sampling until 2014; however, daily sampling was not required under
the monitoring regulations that applied at the time. Further, a
separate calculation based on daily sampling data collected in 2013
at a collocated non-regulatory monitor yields a 98th percentile
value for 2013 similar to that of the primary regulatory monitor.
See memorandum from Michael Flagg, U.S. EPA, Region IX, Air Quality
Analysis Office, ``Implementation of PM2.5 sampling
frequency requirements in Imperial County,'' November 1, 2016. This
memorandum is included in the rulemaking docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Evaluation of Current Attainment
The EPA's evaluation of whether the Imperial County NA has attained
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is based on our review of the
monitoring data and takes into account the adequacy of the
PM2.5 monitoring network in the nonattainment area and the
reliability of the data collected by the network, as previously
discussed.
Table 1 shows the 24-hour PM2.5 design values at each of
the three monitoring sites within the Imperial County NA for the most
recent three-year period (2013-2015).
Table 1--2013-2015 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Values for the Imperial County NA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
98th percentile ([mu]g/m\3\) 2013-2015 24-
--------------------------------------- hour design
Local site name Site (AQS ID) values ([mu]g/
2013 2014 2015 m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calexico Ethel........................... 06-025-0005 27.4 36.3 34.6 33
El Centro................................ 06-025-1003 19.0 19.6 14.1 18
Brawley.................................. 06-025-0007 17.2 19.9 12.4 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: EPA, Design Value Report, December 2, 2016.
The data show that the 24-hour design value for the 2013-2015
period was equal to or less than 35 [mu]g/m\3\ at all monitors.
Therefore, we are proposing to determine, based on complete, quality-
assured, and certified data for 2013-2015, that the Imperial County NA
has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard. Preliminary
data available in AQS for 2016 (January through August) indicate that
the area continues to attain the standard and are consistent with the
[[Page 13395]]
determination of attainment. Additional preliminary data available on
CARB's real-time Web site for September through December are also
consistent with attainment.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ CARB's real-time AQMIS (Air Quality and Meteorological
Information System) database can be found at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/aqmis2.php. AQMIS provides a combination of
preliminary real-time data and historical regulatory data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Analysis of Emissions Inventories
A. California's SIP Submittal for the 2006 PM2.5 Standard
for the Imperial County NA
Today's action also concerns the emissions inventories included in
the ``Imperial County 2013 State Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-
Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area'' (``2013
PM2.5 Plan'' or ``Plan'') adopted by the District on
December 2, 2014 and submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision on January
9, 2015.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, our clean data determination
for the Imperial County NA suspends requirements to submit an
attainment demonstration, associated RACM, RFP plan, contingency
measures, and other SIP revisions related to the attainment of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, but does not suspend the
requirement for an inventory. Therefore, in conjunction with our
clean data determination for the Imperial County NA, we are also
approving the 2008 base year inventories submitted with the 2013
PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Public Notice, Public Hearing, and Completeness Requirements for SIP
Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require each state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submission of a SIP or SIP revision to the
EPA. To meet this requirement, every SIP submission 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.
Both the District and the State satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior
to adoption and submission of the 2013 PM2.5 Plan. The
District provided a public comment period and held a public hearing
prior to the adoption of the SIP submission on December 2, 2014.\21\
CARB provided the required public notice and opportunity for public
comment prior to its December 18, 2014 public hearing and adoption of
the SIP submission.\22\ The submission includes proof of publication of
notices for the respective public hearings. We find, therefore, that
the 2013 PM2.5 Plan meets the procedural requirements for
public notice and hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ ICAPCD, ``Notice of Public Hearing for Adoption of Imperial
County 2013 State Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area,'' published October
24, 2014 and November 2, 2014.
\22\ CARB, ``Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Approval of
the Imperial County 2013 State Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-
Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area,'' November 18,
2014; and CARB Board Resolution 14-43, ``Imperial County 2013 State
Implementation Plan for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Moderate
Nonattainment Area,'' December 18, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the EPA to determine whether a
SIP submission 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 become complete by
operation of law six months after the date of submission. The EPA's SIP
completeness criteria are found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The
January 9, 2015 SIP submission became complete by operation of law on
July 9, 2015.
C. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that each SIP include a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the area. By
requiring an accounting of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutants in the area, this section ensures that the base
year inventory will include all emissions that contribute to the
formation of a particular NAAQS pollutant. For the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, this includes directly emitted PM2.5
(referred to as primary or direct PM2.5) as well as the main
chemical precursors to the formation of secondary PM2.5:
Nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur oxides (SOx),
volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3). Primary
PM2.5 includes condensable and filterable particulate
matter.
A state should include in its SIP submittal documentation
explaining how the emissions data were calculated. In estimating mobile
source emissions, a state should use the latest emissions models and
planning assumptions available at the time the SIP is developed. At the
time the 2013 PM2.5 Plan was developed, California was
required to use the model EMFAC2011 to estimate tailpipe and brake and
tire wear emissions of PM2.5, NOX,
SOx, and VOC from on-road mobile sources (78 FR 14533, March
6, 2013). States are required to use the EPA's AP-42 road dust method
for calculating re-entrained road dust emissions from paved roads (76
FR 6328, February 4, 2011).
D. Emissions Inventories in the 2013 PM2.5 Plan
The annual average planning inventories for direct PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SOx,
VOC, and ammonia) for the Imperial County PM2.5 NA, together
with documentation for the inventories, are found in Chapter 3 of the
2013 PM2.5 Plan. CARB and the District worked together to
develop a complete inventory for all sources in Imperial County using
activity information and emission factors. Activity data may come from
national survey data or reports (e.g., from the United States
Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service) or local sources
such as the Southern California Gas Company, paint suppliers, and
District databases. Emission factors can be based on a number of
variables including source tests, compliance reports, and the EPA's AP-
42.
CARB provided annual average and winter daily average inventories
for 2008, which it designated as the base year for the 2006
PM2.5 Plan. CARB included both annual average and winter
daily average inventories because a majority of the exceedances
addressed by the 2013 PM2.5 Plan occurred in the winter
(November through April). Each inventory includes emissions from point,
area, on-road, and non-road sources. Stationary sources include point
and area sources. Point sources in the Imperial County air basin that
emit 10 tons per year or more of VOC, NOX, SOx,
or PM2.5 report annual emissions to the District.
The District and CARB develop an annual emissions inventory for all
sources in Imperial County, including separate inventories for winter
and summer and an annual average inventory. Point source emissions for
the 2008 base year emission inventories were based on this information.
Area sources include smaller emissions sources distributed across the
nonattainment area. Many small point sources and facilities that are
not inventoried individually are estimated as a group and are included
in the area source category.
The source categories that generate the most emissions (unpaved
roads and tilling and harvesting operations) reflect implementation of
PM10 Best Available Control Measures (BACM) approved rules.
Agricultural burning is regulated under both ICAPCD's EPA-approved Rule
701 and its CARB-approved Smoke Management Plan.
[[Page 13396]]
The on-road mobile inventories use EMFAC2011 for estimating motor
vehicle emissions.\23\ EMFAC2011 calculates emission rates from all
motor vehicles that operate on highways, freeways, and local roads in
California. EMFAC2011 uses California Department of Motor Vehicle
registration data for the number of vehicles, the Southern California
Association of Governments travel demand output model for the number of
vehicle miles traveled, and California Bureau of Automotive Repair for
odometer readings and for emission factors derived from vehicle
surveillance programs and dynamometer readings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 2013 PM2.5 Plan, p. 21-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Off-road emissions such as construction, aircraft (military,
commercial, and civil), gardening equipment, agricultural equipment,
and recreational vehicle emissions were calculated using CARB's 2011
Off-Road Model.\24\ The off-road model uses source population,
activity, and emission estimates for all off-road vehicles, including
boats, outdoor recreational vehicles, industrial and construction
equipment, farm equipment, lawn and garden equipment, aircraft, and
trains.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the Plan's 2008 winter and annual base year
inventories is provided in Table 2 below. For a more detailed
discussion of the inventories, see the 2013 PM2.5 Plan,
Chapter 3.
Table 2--PM2.5 Emissions Inventory by Source Category, Winter and Annual
Planning Emissions Inventories
[tpd (tons per day)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter average Annual average
Source category 2008 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct PM2.5
Stationary Sources.................... 0.495 0.508
Area-Wide Sources..................... 10.786 10.933
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles.................... 0.302 0.301
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft.......................... 0.759 0.760
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational 0.277 0.322
Boats, and Farm Equipment........
-------------------------------
Total Direct PM2.5.............. 12.619 12.824
Nitrogen Oxides
Stationary Sources.................... 1.836 1.875
Area-Wide Sources..................... 0.423 0.462
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles.................... 8.608 8.425
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft.......................... 1.523 1.524
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational 6.053 6.502
Boats, and Farm Equipment........
-------------------------------
Total Nitrogen Oxides........... 18.443 18.788
Volatile Organic Compounds
Stationary Sources.................... 1.059 1.071
Area-Wide Sources..................... 7.639 9.069
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles.................... 1.996 2.072
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft.......................... 2.186 2.189
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational 2.657 3.624
Boats, and Farm Equipment........
-------------------------------
Total Volatile Organic Compounds 15.537 18.025
Sulfur Oxides
Stationary Sources.................... 0.079 0.081
Area-Wide Sources..................... 0.058 0.068
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles.................... 0.015 0.015
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft.......................... 0.204 0.205
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational 0.026 0.026
Boats and Farm Equipment.........
-------------------------------
Total Sulfur Oxides............. 0.382 0.395
Ammonia
Stationary Sources.................... 3.142 3.100
Area-Wide Sources..................... 27.622 31.693
Mobile Sources:
On-Road Vehicles.................... 0.166 0.166
Other Mobile Sources:
Aircraft.......................... 0.000 0.000
Off-Road, Trains, Recreational 0.002 0.002
Boats and Farm Equipment.........
-------------------------------
Total Ammonia................... 30.932 34.961
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2013 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 3, Tables 3.1, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, and 3.10.
[[Page 13397]]
E. EPA's Evaluation and Final Action
The inventories in the 2013 PM2.5 Plan are based on the
most current and accurate information available to the State and
District at the time the Plan and its inventories were being developed,
including the latest EPA-approved version of California's mobile source
emissions model, EMFAC2011, and the EPA's most recent AP-42 methodology
for paved road dust. The inventories comprehensively address all source
categories in the Imperial County NA and were developed consistent with
the EPA's inventory guidance. For these reasons, we are approving the
2013 PM2.5 Plan's annual average and winter daily average
inventories for 2008 as meeting the requirements of CAA section
172(c)(3).
IV. Final Action
The EPA is determining that the Imperial County NA has attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015,
this clean data determination suspends the requirements for this area
to submit an attainment demonstration, associated RACM, RFP plan,
contingency measures, and any other planning SIP revisions related to
the attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, so long as
this area continues to meet the standard. This clean data determination
does not constitute a redesignation to attainment. The Imperial County
NA will remain designated nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as the EPA determines, pursuant
to sections 107 and 175A of the CAA, that the Imperial County NA meets
the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an
approved maintenance plan showing that the area will continue to meet
the standard for 10 years. We are also approving the 2013
PM2.5 Plan's annual average and winter daily average
inventories for 2008 as meeting the requirements of CAA section
172(c)(3).
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
approving the submitted base year emissions inventory because we
believe it fulfills all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone
will object to this inventory approval or the CDD, so we are finalizing
them without proposing in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules
section of this issue of the Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing to make a CDD and proposing approval of the same submitted
emissions inventory. If we receive adverse comments by April 12, 2017,
we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify
the public that some or all of the provisions of the direct final
approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a
subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on May 12, 2017.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action makes a clean data determination based on air quality
and suspends certain federal requirements, and thus, does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. In addition,
under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly,
this proposed action merely approves State law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For these reasons, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: January 3, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(484) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(484) The following plan was submitted on January 9, 2015, by the
Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Imperial County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) ``Imperial County 2013 State Implementation Plan for the 2006
24-Hour PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area,'' adopted
December 2, 2014, Chapter 3 (``Emissions Inventory'') excluding:
Section 3.4.1 (``Determination of Significant Sources of
PM2.5 Precursors''); the 2011 and 2012 winter and annual
average inventories in Table 3.1 (``PM2.5 Emissions
Inventory by Major Source Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and
Annual
[[Page 13398]]
Planning Emissions Inventories''); the 2011 and 2012 winter and annual
average inventories in Table 3.7 (``NOX Emissions Inventory
by Major Source Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual Planning
Emissions Inventories''); the 2011 and 2012 winter and annual average
inventories in Table 3.8 (``VOCs Emissions Inventory by Major Source
Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual Planning Emissions
Inventories''); the 2011 and 2012 winter and annual average inventories
in Table 3.9 (``SOX Emissions Inventory by Major Source
Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual Planning Emissions
Inventories''); and the 2011 and 2012 winter and annual average
inventories in Table 3.10 (``Ammonia Emissions Inventory by Major
Source Category 2008, 2011 and 2012 Winter and Annual Planning
Emissions Inventories'').
0
3. Section 52.247 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.247 Control strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.
* * * * *
(i) Determination of attainment. Effective May 12, 2017, EPA has
determined that, based on 2013 to 2015 ambient air quality data, the
Imperial County PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Under the provisions of EPA's
PM2.5 implementation rule (see 40 CFR 51.1015), this
determination suspends the requirements for this area to submit an
attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control
measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and
other planning SIPs related to attainment for as long as this area
continues to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. If EPA
determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking, that this area no
longer meets the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the corresponding
determination of attainment for that area shall be withdrawn.
[FR Doc. 2017-04780 Filed 3-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
