Air Plan Approval; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District; Reclassification, 22235-22238 [2018-10217]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
dispersion modeling) that would trigger
a processing fee due by the applicant
from $150.00 to $325.00 (33–15–23–
02.2); and (3) remove the option for an
applicant to withdraw an application
without paying any processing fees (33–
15–23–02.2.b). CAA Section 110(a)(2)(E)
requires that a state implementation
plan provide assurances that the state
will have, among other items, adequate
funding to carry out the implementation
plan. As explained in a memo to
interested parties, increasing the
application fee and the processing fee
threshold as well as removing the
option for an applicant to withdraw an
application without paying processing
fees reflect both inflation and the
increased complexity of permit to
construct applications, thereby ensuring
the State has adequate funding to carry
out the implementation plan.25 26
Therefore, we propose to approve these
revisions.
III. The EPA’s Proposed Action
In this action, the EPA is proposing to
approve SIP amendments to North
Dakota Air Pollution Control Rules,
shown in Table 1, submitted by the
State of North Dakota on January 28,
2013 and November 11, 2016.
TABLE 1—LIST OF NORTH DAKOTA
AMENDMENTS THAT THE EPA IS
PROPOSING TO APPROVE
Amended Section in the January 28, 2013
Submittal Proposed for Approval
33–15–14–02.1.c.
Amended Sections in the November 11,
2016 Submittal Proposed for Approval
33–15–01–04.52, 33–15–14–02.1.c, 33–15–
14–02.6.b(2), 33–15–14–03.5.a(1)(b), 33–
15–14–03.5.a(1)(d), 33–15–14–03.9.a, 33–
15–14–03.9.b, 33–15–15–01.2, 33–15–20–
01.1, 33–15–20–01.2, 33–15–20–02.1, 33–
15–20–02.2, 33–15–20–03.1, 33–15–20–
03.2, 33–15–23–02.1, 33–15–23–02.2.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
the amendments described in section III.
The EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region 8 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 11, 2018
Jkt 244001
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
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 CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not proposed to
apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22235
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, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 9, 2018.
Douglas Benevento,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2018–10208 Filed 5–11–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0223; FRL–9978–01–
Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; California; Eastern
Kern Air Pollution Control District;
Reclassification
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is proposing to grant a request by the
State of California to reclassify the
Eastern Kern County (‘‘Eastern Kern’’)
nonattainment area from ‘‘Moderate’’ to
‘‘Serious’’ for the 2008 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
In connection with the reclassification,
the EPA is proposing to establish a
deadline of no later than 12 months
from the effective date of reclassification
for submittal of revisions to the Eastern
Kern portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet
certain additional requirements for
Serious ozone nonattainment areas. The
EPA has already received SIP revision
submittals addressing most of the
additional SIP requirements.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
June 13, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2018–0223 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Nancy Levin, at levin.nancy@epa.gov.
For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
22236
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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 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.
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
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Background
II. State Request for Reclassification
III. Evaluation of Voluntary Reclassification
Request
IV. Proposed Action and Public Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the
EPA to establish a NAAQS for certain
pervasive pollutants that ‘‘may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health and welfare’’ and to
develop a primary and secondary
standard for each NAAQS. The primary
standard is designed to protect public
health with an adequate margin of
safety, and the secondary standard is
designed to protect public welfare and
the environment. The EPA has set
NAAQS for six common air pollutants,
referred to as criteria pollutants,
including ozone. The NAAQS
represents the air quality levels an area
must meet to comply with the CAA.
Ozone is a gas composed of three
oxygen atoms and is created by a
chemical reaction between volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) in the atmosphere in the
presence of sunlight. Ground-level
ozone can harm human health and the
environment. Ozone exposure has been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 11, 2018
Jkt 244001
associated with increased susceptibility
to respiratory infections, medication use
by asthmatics, doctor visits, and
emergency department visits and
hospital admissions for individuals with
respiratory disease. Ozone exposure
may also contribute to premature death,
especially in people with heart and lung
disease.
In March 2008, the EPA strengthened
the primary and secondary eight-hour
ozone NAAQS from 0.08 parts per
million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm (‘‘2008
ozone NAAQS’’). 73 FR 16436 (March
27, 2008).1 In accordance with section
107(d) of the CAA, the EPA must
designate an area ‘‘nonattainment’’ if it
is violating the NAAQS or if it is
contributing to a violation of the
NAAQS in a nearby area. With respect
to the ozone NAAQS, the EPA further
classifies nonattainment areas as
‘‘Marginal,’’ ‘‘Moderate,’’ ‘‘Serious,’’
‘‘Severe,’’ or ‘‘Extreme,’’ depending
upon the ozone design value for an
area.2 See CAA section 181(a)(1). As a
general matter, higher classified ozone
nonattainment areas are subject to a
greater number of, and more stringent,
SIP requirements than lower classified
areas but are allowed more time to
demonstrate attainment of the ozone
NAAQS. See, generally, subpart 2 of
part D of title I of the CAA. Depending
upon the classification, states with
ozone nonattainment areas are required
under the CAA to develop and submit
SIP revisions providing for, among other
elements, a base year emissions
inventory, new source review (NSR),
implementation of reasonably available
control technology (RACT), reasonable
further progress (RFP), a demonstration
of attainment, and contingency
measures.
Effective July 20, 2012, the EPA
established initial air quality
designations for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. The EPA designated and
initially classified Eastern Kern 3 as a
1 Today’s proposed rule relates to classifications
and SIP submittal obligations associated with the
2008 ozone NAAQS. In 2015, the EPA further
tightened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.075 ppm
to 0.070 ppm (‘‘2015 ozone NAAQS’’). 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015). Designations, classifications and
SIP obligations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS are
being addressed separately from this action.
2 For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the design value at
each monitoring site is the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration, averaged over three years. The
design value for an area is the highest design value
among the monitoring sites.
3 Kern County is located in the southern-most
portion of California’s Central Valley. The western
half of Kern County is part of the San Joaquin
Valley air basin and is included within the San
Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area. The
eastern half of Kern County is part of the Mojave
Desert air basin. The Eastern Kern ozone
nonattainment area covers the eastern half of the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Marginal nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088 (May
21, 2012). For Marginal ozone
nonattainment areas, the attainment
date for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is as
expeditious as practicable but not later
than three years from the effective date
of designation, i.e., no later than July 20,
2015. See 40 CFR 51.1103(a).
Under CAA section 181(b)(2), the EPA
is required to determine whether an area
attained the ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date, and in May
2016, the EPA found that Eastern Kern
had failed to attain the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by the applicable Marginal
attainment date (i.e., by July 20, 2015)
and reclassified the area as Moderate. 81
FR 26697 (May 4, 2016). For Moderate
ozone nonattainment areas, the
attainment date is as expeditious as
practicable but not later than July 20,
2018. See 40 CFR 51.1103(a). States
with newly-reclassified Moderate ozone
areas were required to submit SIP
revisions meeting the applicable
Moderate area requirements by January
1, 2017. 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016).
II. State Request for Reclassification
As described above, in 2016, the EPA
reclassified the Eastern Kern 2008 ozone
nonattainment area to Moderate, and, in
response to the reclassification, the
Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District (EKAPCD) began to develop an
ozone plan meeting the applicable
ozone nonattainment area requirements,
such as an attainment demonstration.
However, in light of the attainment
demonstration needs for the area, the
EKAPCD developed the ozone plan,
titled Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District 2017 Ozone Attainment Plan for
the Federal 75 ppb 8-Hour Ozone
Standard (‘‘Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan’’), to meet Serious, rather than
Moderate, ozone nonattainment
requirements. The Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan includes a request to the
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
to formally submit a request to the EPA
asking for voluntary reclassification of
the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area from Moderate to Serious for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.4 On July 27, 2017,
the EKAPCD adopted the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan and transmitted the
plan to CARB for approval and
submittal to the EPA. Through
Resolution 17–25 (dated September 28,
2017), CARB adopted the plan and the
EKAPCD’s request for voluntary
county excluding Indian Wells Valley. For more
detail on the boundaries of the Eastern Kern ozone
nonattainment area, see the 2008 ozone table in 40
CFR 81.305.
4 See page vi of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan.
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
reclassification. Subsequently, on
October 25, 2017, CARB submitted the
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan to the
EPA as a revision to the California SIP.
CARB’s October 25, 2017 SIP revision
submittal constitutes a request for
reclassification of the Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment area.
III. Evaluation of Voluntary
Reclassification Request
Under the EPA’s ozone
implementation rule at 40 CFR
51.1103(b), a state may request, and the
EPA must approve, a higher
classification for any reason in
accordance with CAA section
181(b)(3).5 We find that the plain
language of CAA section 181(b)(3) and
40 CFR 51.1103(b) mandates that we
approve voluntary reclassification
requests, and thus, the EPA proposes in
this action to grant CARB’s request to
reclassify the Eastern Kern
nonattainment area from Moderate to
Serious for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Upon the effective date of a final action
granting the reclassification, the area
will be required to attain the 2008 ozone
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable,
but not later than July 20, 2021.
By granting a state’s request to
reclassify an ozone nonattainment area
to a higher classification, the EPA must
address submittal deadlines for SIP
requirements that have become
applicable to an area as a result of its
higher classification. Such SIP
requirements include submittals that
include provisions to require
implementation of RACT for existing
stationary sources and permits for new
or modified stationary sources (i.e.,
NSR), and to provide for RFP,
attainment and contingency measures.
For areas reclassified from Moderate to
Serious, the ‘‘major source’’ threshold
for RACT and NSR purposes falls from
100 tons per year of VOC or NOX to 50
tons per year of VOC or NOX.
As noted above, in October 2017,
CARB submitted the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan to the EPA as a revision to
the California SIP. We have reviewed
the October 2017 submittal and find that
it addresses the following Serious ozone
area SIP requirements: Base year
emissions inventory, emission
statements, reasonably available control
measure (RACM) demonstration, RFP,
attainment demonstration and
contingency measures.
In addition, on August 9, 2017, CARB
submitted the EKAPCD’s Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT)
5 CAA section 181(b)(3) provides that the EPA
shall grant the request of any state to reclassify an
ozone nonattainment area to a higher classification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 11, 2018
Jkt 244001
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the
2008 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) (‘‘Eastern
Kern 2017 RACT SIP’’) to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP. The
Eastern Kern 2017 RACT SIP was
developed to meet the RACT
requirements for Serious ozone
nonattainment areas in anticipation of
submittal by CARB to the EPA of the
voluntary reclassification request
contained in the Eastern Kern 2017
Ozone Plan.6 We have reviewed the
August 2017 SIP submittal and find that
it addresses the following Serious ozone
area RACT-related SIP requirements:
VOC sources covered by a Control
Technology Guidelines (CTG) document
and non-CTG major sources of VOC.
The Eastern Kern 2017 RACT SIP does
not fully address RACT requirements for
non-CTG major sources of NOX.
Upon review of the two SIP revision
submittals described above, we find that
all the SIP elements that apply to
Eastern Kern as a Serious ozone
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS have been addressed except for
NSR and RACT for major sources of
NOX. The EPA is proposing a schedule
for additional SIP revisions for these
two SIP elements of no later than 12
months from the effective date of
reclassification.7
IV. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
Pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(3)
and 40 CFR 51.1103(b), the EPA is
proposing to grant the reclassification
request by the State of California for the
Eastern Kern 2008 ozone nonattainment
area from Moderate to Serious, and to
change the ‘‘California—2008 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and
secondary)’’ table in 40 CFR 81.305
accordingly. In connection with the
reclassification, the EPA is proposing to
establish a deadline of no later than 12
months from the effective date of
reclassification for submittal of
revisions to the Eastern Kern portion of
the SIP to meet the Serious area
requirements for NSR and for RACT for
major sources of NOX. The EPA is not
proposing a SIP revision schedule for
6 See pages 9 and 10 of the Eastern Kern 2017
RACT SIP.
7 Upon the effective date of reclassification, we
note that certain regulatory changes would occur
automatically and do not require a SIP revision. For
example, upon reclassification from Moderate to
Serious, the applicability (or ‘‘de minimis’’)
thresholds under our General Conformity rule (see
40 CFR part 93) would drop from 100 tons per year
to 50 tons per year for VOC or NOX. See 40 CFR
93.153(b)(1). Under the General Conformity rule,
federal agencies bear the responsibility of
determining conformity of actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas that require Federal permits,
approvals, or funding.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22237
any Serious area SIP requirements for
which SIP submittals have already been
received. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal until
June 13, 2018.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76
FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this
proposed action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget. Voluntary
reclassifications under section 181(b)(3)
of the CAA are based solely upon
requests by the state, and the EPA is
required under the CAA to grant them.
This proposed action does not, in and
of itself, impose any new requirements
on any sector of the economy. In
addition, because the statutory
requirements are clearly defined with
respect to the differently classified
areas, and because those requirements
are automatically triggered by
classification, reclassification does not
impose a materially adverse impact
under Executive Order 12866. For these
reasons, this proposed action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). Furthermore, this proposed
action is not an Executive Order 13771
(82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017)
regulatory action because actions such
as reclassifications made at the request
of a state are exempt under Executive
Order 12866.
In addition, I certify that this
proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). This proposed action 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), because the EPA is
required to grant requests by states for
voluntary reclassifications and such
reclassifications in and of themselves do
not impose any federal
intergovernmental mandate.
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000) requires the EPA to
develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
22238
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.’’ There
are no Indian reservation lands or other
areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction within the Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment area, and thus,
this proposed 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.
This proposed action also does not
have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects
on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and
the states, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
proposed action does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 May 11, 2018
Jkt 244001
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
This proposed rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because the EPA
interprets Executive Order 13045 as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive
Order has the potential to influence the
regulation.
Reclassification actions do not
involve technical standards and thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This proposed
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States. This
proposed reclassification action relates
to ozone, a pollutant that is regional in
nature, and is not the type of action that
could result in the types of local
impacts addressed in Executive Order
12898.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, National parks, Ozone,
Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 1, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018–10217 Filed 5–11–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 93 (Monday, May 14, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22235-22238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10217]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0223; FRL-9978-01-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District; Reclassification
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is proposing to grant a request by the State of California to
reclassify the Eastern Kern County (``Eastern Kern'') nonattainment
area from ``Moderate'' to ``Serious'' for the 2008 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In connection with the
reclassification, the EPA is proposing to establish a deadline of no
later than 12 months from the effective date of reclassification for
submittal of revisions to the Eastern Kern portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet certain additional requirements
for Serious ozone nonattainment areas. The EPA has already received SIP
revision submittals addressing most of the additional SIP requirements.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by June 13, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2018-0223 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Nancy
Levin, at [email protected]. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
[[Page 22236]]
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 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3848, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. State Request for Reclassification
III. Evaluation of Voluntary Reclassification Request
IV. Proposed Action and Public Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the EPA to establish a NAAQS for
certain pervasive pollutants that ``may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health and welfare'' and to develop a primary and
secondary standard for each NAAQS. The primary standard is designed to
protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, and the
secondary standard is designed to protect public welfare and the
environment. The EPA has set NAAQS for six common air pollutants,
referred to as criteria pollutants, including ozone. The NAAQS
represents the air quality levels an area must meet to comply with the
CAA.
Ozone is a gas composed of three oxygen atoms and is created by a
chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) in the atmosphere in the presence of
sunlight. Ground-level ozone can harm human health and the environment.
Ozone exposure has been associated with increased susceptibility to
respiratory infections, medication use by asthmatics, doctor visits,
and emergency department visits and hospital admissions for individuals
with respiratory disease. Ozone exposure may also contribute to
premature death, especially in people with heart and lung disease.
In March 2008, the EPA strengthened the primary and secondary
eight-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm
(``2008 ozone NAAQS''). 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).\1\ In accordance
with section 107(d) of the CAA, the EPA must designate an area
``nonattainment'' if it is violating the NAAQS or if it is contributing
to a violation of the NAAQS in a nearby area. With respect to the ozone
NAAQS, the EPA further classifies nonattainment areas as ``Marginal,''
``Moderate,'' ``Serious,'' ``Severe,'' or ``Extreme,'' depending upon
the ozone design value for an area.\2\ See CAA section 181(a)(1). As a
general matter, higher classified ozone nonattainment areas are subject
to a greater number of, and more stringent, SIP requirements than lower
classified areas but are allowed more time to demonstrate attainment of
the ozone NAAQS. See, generally, subpart 2 of part D of title I of the
CAA. Depending upon the classification, states with ozone nonattainment
areas are required under the CAA to develop and submit SIP revisions
providing for, among other elements, a base year emissions inventory,
new source review (NSR), implementation of reasonably available control
technology (RACT), reasonable further progress (RFP), a demonstration
of attainment, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Today's proposed rule relates to classifications and SIP
submittal obligations associated with the 2008 ozone NAAQS. In 2015,
the EPA further tightened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.075 ppm to
0.070 ppm (``2015 ozone NAAQS''). 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
Designations, classifications and SIP obligations for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS are being addressed separately from this action.
\2\ For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the design value at each
monitoring site is the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentration, averaged over three years. The design
value for an area is the highest design value among the monitoring
sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective July 20, 2012, the EPA established initial air quality
designations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA designated and initially
classified Eastern Kern \3\ as a Marginal nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). For Marginal ozone
nonattainment areas, the attainment date for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is as
expeditious as practicable but not later than three years from the
effective date of designation, i.e., no later than July 20, 2015. See
40 CFR 51.1103(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Kern County is located in the southern-most portion of
California's Central Valley. The western half of Kern County is part
of the San Joaquin Valley air basin and is included within the San
Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area. The eastern half of Kern
County is part of the Mojave Desert air basin. The Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment area covers the eastern half of the county
excluding Indian Wells Valley. For more detail on the boundaries of
the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area, see the 2008 ozone table
in 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 181(b)(2), the EPA is required to determine
whether an area attained the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date, and in May 2016, the EPA found that Eastern Kern had failed to
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable Marginal attainment date
(i.e., by July 20, 2015) and reclassified the area as Moderate. 81 FR
26697 (May 4, 2016). For Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, the
attainment date is as expeditious as practicable but not later than
July 20, 2018. See 40 CFR 51.1103(a). States with newly-reclassified
Moderate ozone areas were required to submit SIP revisions meeting the
applicable Moderate area requirements by January 1, 2017. 81 FR 26697
(May 4, 2016).
II. State Request for Reclassification
As described above, in 2016, the EPA reclassified the Eastern Kern
2008 ozone nonattainment area to Moderate, and, in response to the
reclassification, the Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District
(EKAPCD) began to develop an ozone plan meeting the applicable ozone
nonattainment area requirements, such as an attainment demonstration.
However, in light of the attainment demonstration needs for the area,
the EKAPCD developed the ozone plan, titled Eastern Kern Air Pollution
Control District 2017 Ozone Attainment Plan for the Federal 75 ppb 8-
Hour Ozone Standard (``Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan''), to meet
Serious, rather than Moderate, ozone nonattainment requirements. The
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan includes a request to the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) to formally submit a request to the EPA asking
for voluntary reclassification of the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area from Moderate to Serious for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\4\ On July 27,
2017, the EKAPCD adopted the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan and
transmitted the plan to CARB for approval and submittal to the EPA.
Through Resolution 17-25 (dated September 28, 2017), CARB adopted the
plan and the EKAPCD's request for voluntary
[[Page 22237]]
reclassification. Subsequently, on October 25, 2017, CARB submitted the
Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan to the EPA as a revision to the California
SIP. CARB's October 25, 2017 SIP revision submittal constitutes a
request for reclassification of the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See page vi of the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Evaluation of Voluntary Reclassification Request
Under the EPA's ozone implementation rule at 40 CFR 51.1103(b), a
state may request, and the EPA must approve, a higher classification
for any reason in accordance with CAA section 181(b)(3).\5\ We find
that the plain language of CAA section 181(b)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1103(b)
mandates that we approve voluntary reclassification requests, and thus,
the EPA proposes in this action to grant CARB's request to reclassify
the Eastern Kern nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. Upon the effective date of a final action granting
the reclassification, the area will be required to attain the 2008
ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but not later than July
20, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ CAA section 181(b)(3) provides that the EPA shall grant the
request of any state to reclassify an ozone nonattainment area to a
higher classification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By granting a state's request to reclassify an ozone nonattainment
area to a higher classification, the EPA must address submittal
deadlines for SIP requirements that have become applicable to an area
as a result of its higher classification. Such SIP requirements include
submittals that include provisions to require implementation of RACT
for existing stationary sources and permits for new or modified
stationary sources (i.e., NSR), and to provide for RFP, attainment and
contingency measures. For areas reclassified from Moderate to Serious,
the ``major source'' threshold for RACT and NSR purposes falls from 100
tons per year of VOC or NOX to 50 tons per year of VOC or
NOX.
As noted above, in October 2017, CARB submitted the Eastern Kern
2017 Ozone Plan to the EPA as a revision to the California SIP. We have
reviewed the October 2017 submittal and find that it addresses the
following Serious ozone area SIP requirements: Base year emissions
inventory, emission statements, reasonably available control measure
(RACM) demonstration, RFP, attainment demonstration and contingency
measures.
In addition, on August 9, 2017, CARB submitted the EKAPCD's
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) (``Eastern Kern 2017 RACT SIP'') to the EPA as a revision to
the California SIP. The Eastern Kern 2017 RACT SIP was developed to
meet the RACT requirements for Serious ozone nonattainment areas in
anticipation of submittal by CARB to the EPA of the voluntary
reclassification request contained in the Eastern Kern 2017 Ozone
Plan.\6\ We have reviewed the August 2017 SIP submittal and find that
it addresses the following Serious ozone area RACT-related SIP
requirements: VOC sources covered by a Control Technology Guidelines
(CTG) document and non-CTG major sources of VOC. The Eastern Kern 2017
RACT SIP does not fully address RACT requirements for non-CTG major
sources of NOX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See pages 9 and 10 of the Eastern Kern 2017 RACT SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon review of the two SIP revision submittals described above, we
find that all the SIP elements that apply to Eastern Kern as a Serious
ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS have been addressed
except for NSR and RACT for major sources of NOX. The EPA is
proposing a schedule for additional SIP revisions for these two SIP
elements of no later than 12 months from the effective date of
reclassification.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Upon the effective date of reclassification, we note that
certain regulatory changes would occur automatically and do not
require a SIP revision. For example, upon reclassification from
Moderate to Serious, the applicability (or ``de minimis'')
thresholds under our General Conformity rule (see 40 CFR part 93)
would drop from 100 tons per year to 50 tons per year for VOC or
NOX. See 40 CFR 93.153(b)(1). Under the General
Conformity rule, federal agencies bear the responsibility of
determining conformity of actions in nonattainment and maintenance
areas that require Federal permits, approvals, or funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proposed Action and Public Comment
Pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1103(b), the EPA is
proposing to grant the reclassification request by the State of
California for the Eastern Kern 2008 ozone nonattainment area from
Moderate to Serious, and to change the ``California--2008 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' table in 40 CFR 81.305 accordingly. In
connection with the reclassification, the EPA is proposing to establish
a deadline of no later than 12 months from the effective date of
reclassification for submittal of revisions to the Eastern Kern portion
of the SIP to meet the Serious area requirements for NSR and for RACT
for major sources of NOX. The EPA is not proposing a SIP
revision schedule for any Serious area SIP requirements for which SIP
submittals have already been received. We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal until June 13, 2018.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this proposed action is not a
``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget. Voluntary
reclassifications under section 181(b)(3) of the CAA are based solely
upon requests by the state, and the EPA is required under the CAA to
grant them. This proposed action does not, in and of itself, impose any
new requirements on any sector of the economy. In addition, because the
statutory requirements are clearly defined with respect to the
differently classified areas, and because those requirements are
automatically triggered by classification, reclassification does not
impose a materially adverse impact under Executive Order 12866. For
these reasons, this proposed action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Furthermore, this proposed action is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because actions such as
reclassifications made at the request of a state are exempt under
Executive Order 12866.
In addition, I certify that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This
proposed action 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), because the EPA is
required to grant requests by states for voluntary reclassifications
and such reclassifications in and of themselves do not impose any
federal intergovernmental mandate.
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires the
EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the
[[Page 22238]]
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.'' There are no Indian reservation lands
or other areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction within the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area, and thus, this proposed 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.
This proposed action also does not have Federalism implications
because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on
the relationship between the national government and the states, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This proposed action does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045,
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because the EPA interprets
Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that
concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under
section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the
regulation.
Reclassification actions do not involve technical standards and
thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. This proposed reclassification action
relates to ozone, a pollutant that is regional in nature, and is not
the type of action that could result in the types of local impacts
addressed in Executive Order 12898.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, National parks, Ozone, Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 1, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-10217 Filed 5-11-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P