Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; South Coast Serious Area Plan for the 2006 PM2.5, 3305-3308 [2019-01922]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
practicable 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, this final 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).
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 April 15, 2019.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 12, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Feb 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
3305
Plan, adopted on March 23, 2017,
except for the subchapter titled ‘‘South
Coast Commitment’’ in chapter 3
(‘‘Proposed SIP Commitment’’).
[FR Doc. 2019–01686 Filed 2–11–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(191)(i)(E),
(c)(496)(ii)(B)(2) and (3), and (c)(513) to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0490; FRL–9988–60–
Region 9]
Identification of plan—in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(191) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 1160, ‘‘Emission Statements,’’
adopted on November 18, 1992.
*
*
*
*
*
(496) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) Resolution 16–6–20, In the Matter
of: Adopting the San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
2016 Ozone Plan for the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone Standard, June 16, 2016,
commitment to adopt, implement and
submit measures committed to in the
2016 Ozone Plan for the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone Standard, only.
(3) 2016 Ozone Plan for 2008 8-Hour
Ozone Standard, adopted June 16, 2016,
excluding subchapters 3.4 (‘‘Reasonably
Available Control Technology’’), 3.11.1
(‘‘Emission Inventory Requirements’’),
6.3.2 (‘‘Reasonable Further Progress
Requirements’’), and 6.4 (‘‘Contingency
for Attainment’’); appendix C
(‘‘Stationary and Area Source Control
Strategy Evaluations’’); and tables D–1
and D–4 through D–8 in attachment B
(‘‘San Joaquin Valley 8-Hr Ozone Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets’’) of
appendix D (‘‘Mobile Source Control
Strategy’’).
*
*
*
*
*
(513) The following plan was
submitted on April 27, 2017, by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials. (A)
California Air Resources Board.
(1) Resolution 17–7, 2016 State
Strategy for the State Implementation
Plan, March 23, 2017, commitments to
a rulemaking schedule and to achieve
aggregate emission reductions of 8 tons
per day of NOX in San Joaquin Valley
by 2031, and the rulemaking schedule
included in attachment A to Resolution
17–7, only.
(2) Revised Proposed 2016 State
Strategy for the State Implementation
PO 00000
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; California;
South Coast Serious Area Plan for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving portions of
a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision submitted by California to
address Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’)
requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or ‘‘standards’’) in the Los AngelesSouth Coast air basin (South Coast)
Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area. The
EPA is also approving 2017 and 2019
motor vehicle emissions budgets for
transportation conformity purposes and
inter-pollutant trading ratios for use in
transportation conformity analyses.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 14, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0490. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. 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 publicly
available 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415–
972–3964, Vagenas.Ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12FER1.SGM
12FER1
3306
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Epidemiological studies have shown
statistically significant correlations
between elevated levels of PM2.5
(particulate matter with a diameter of
2.5 microns or less) and premature
mortality. Other important health effects
associated with PM2.5 exposure include
aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, changes in lung
function, and increased respiratory
symptoms. Individuals particularly
sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung
disease, and children.1 PM2.5 can be
emitted directly into the atmosphere as
a solid or liquid particle (‘‘primary
PM2.5’’ or ‘‘direct PM2.5’’) or can be
formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions among
precursor pollutants such as nitrogen
oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic
compounds, and ammonia (‘‘secondary
PM2.5’’).2
The EPA first established NAAQS for
PM2.5 on July 18, 1997.3 On October 17,
2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour
NAAQS for PM2.5 to provide increased
protection of public health by lowering
the level from 65 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3.4
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
CAA section 107(d) to designate areas
throughout the nation as attaining or not
attaining the NAAQS. On November 13,
2009, the EPA designated the South
Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 24hour PM2.5 standards.5 This designation
became effective on December 14,
2009.6 On June 2, 2014, the EPA
classified the South Coast area as
‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment for both the
1997 PM2.5 standards and the 2006
PM2.5 standards under subpart 4 of part
D, title I of the Act.7
1 78
FR 3086, 3088 (January 15, 2013).
FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
3 62 FR 38652. The initial NAAQS for PM
2.5
included annual standards of 15.0 mg/m3 based on
a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations and 24-hour (daily) standards of 65
mg/m3 based on a 3-year average of 98th percentile
24-hour concentrations (40 CFR 50.7).
4 40 CFR 50.13 and 71 FR 61144. In 2012, the EPA
revised the annual standards to lower them to 12
mg/m3 (78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013), codified at
40 CFR 50.18). Unless otherwise noted, all
references to the PM2.5 standards in this notice are
to the 2006 24-hour NAAQS of 35 mg/m3 codified
at 40 CFR 50.13.
5 74 FR 58688.
6 40 CFR 81.305.
7 79 FR 31566. The EPA took this action in
response to a decision of the Court of Appeals for
2 72
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Feb 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
On January 13, 2016, the EPA
published a final rule reclassifying the
South Coast area as ‘‘Serious’’
nonattainment under subpart 4, based
on the EPA’s determination that the area
could not practicably attain the 2006
PM2.5 standards by the Moderate area
attainment date, which was December
31, 2015.8 This reclassification became
effective on February 12, 2016.
The local air district with primary
responsibility for developing a plan to
attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this
area is the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (‘‘District’’ or
SCAQMD). The District works
cooperatively with the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) in preparing
these plans. State authority for
regulating sources in the South Coast is
split between the District, which has
responsibility for regulating stationary
and most area sources, and CARB,
which has responsibility for regulating
most mobile sources and some
categories of consumer products.
As a consequence of its
reclassification as a Serious PM2.5
nonattainment area, the South Coast
became subject to a new attainment date
under CAA section 188(c)(2) and to the
requirement to submit a Serious area
plan that satisfies the requirements of
part D of title I of the Act, including the
requirements of subpart 4, for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.9 As explained in the
EPA’s final reclassification action, the
Serious area plan for the South Coast
must include provisions to assure that
the best available control measures
(BACM) for the control of direct PM2.5
and PM2.5 precursors will be
implemented no later than 4 years after
the area is reclassified (CAA section
189(b)(1)(B)), and a demonstration
(including air quality modeling) that the
plan provides for attainment as
expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2019, which is the
latest permissible attainment date under
CAA section 188(c)(2).10
On October 3, 2018, we proposed to
approve portions of a SIP revision
submitted by California to address CAA
requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in South Coast Serious
nonattainment area.11 The submitted
SIP revision is the ‘‘Final 2016 Air
the D.C. Circuit finding that the EPA had erred in
implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant solely to
the general implementation provisions of subpart 1
of Part D, Title I of the Act, without also
considering the particulate matter-specific
provisions of subpart 4 of Part D. Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C.
Cir. 2013).
8 81 FR 1514.
9 81 FR 1514, 1518 (January 13, 2016).
10 Id.
11 83 FR 49872.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Quality Management Plan (March
2017),’’ adopted by the SCAQMD
Governing Board on March 3, 2017
(‘‘2016 PM2.5 Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’). CARB
submitted the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to the
EPA on April 27, 2017.12
The EPA proposed to approve the
following portions of the 2016 PM2.5
Plan under CAA section 110(k)(3): The
2012 base year emissions inventory,
provisions assuring that BACM,
including best available control
technology (BACT), for the control of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will
be implemented no later than 4 years
after the area was reclassified, the
demonstration (including air quality
modeling) that the plan provides for
attainment as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December
31, 2019, provisions that require
reasonable further progress (RFP)
toward attainment by the applicable
attainment date, quantitative milestones
that are to be achieved every 3 years
until the area is redesignated attainment
and that demonstrate RFP, and 2017 and
2019 motor vehicle emissions budgets.13
The EPA also proposed to approve the
inter-pollutant trading mechanism
provided in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and
clarified in a March 14, 2018 letter from
the District, for use in transportation
conformity analyses for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, in accordance with 40 CFR
93.124. Finally, the EPA proposed to
find that the requirement for
contingency measures to be undertaken
if the area fails to make reasonable
further progress under CAA section
172(c)(9) is moot as applied to the 2017
milestone year because the State and
District have demonstrated to the EPA’s
satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met. The rationale for our
proposed action is included in the
proposal and will not be restated here.
We did not propose any action on the
attainment contingency measure
component of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan.
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
The EPA’s proposed action provided
a 30-day public comment period that
ended on November 2, 2018. During this
comment period, we received three
12 Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX,
with enclosures. Our proposed rule erroneously
stated that we were also proposing to act on CARB’s
‘‘2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation
Plan (March 2017),’’ also submitted on April 27,
2017. That submission, however, is not a necessary
component of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. See email dated
November 15, 2018, from Scott King, CARB, to
Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, Subject: ‘‘RE:
question about SC 2006 PM2.5 Plan.’’
13 83 FR 49872.
E:\FR\FM\12FER1.SGM
12FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
anonymous comments. Two of these
commenters expressed criticism of a
political nature unrelated to this action
specifically or to environmental
protection generally. The third
commenter raised concerns about the
damage and risks associated with
hydraulic fracturing (commonly referred
to as ‘‘fracking’’). Hydraulic fracturing is
not addressed in this action. After
reviewing these comments, we have
concluded that they are outside the
scope of our proposed action and fail to
identify any material issue necessitating
a response. The comments have been
added to the docket for this action and
are accessible at https://
www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPAR09-OAR-2017-0490.
III. Final Action
The EPA is taking final action to
approve portions of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan
submitted by the State of California to
address attainment of the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS in the South Coast PM2.5
Serious nonattainment area. We are
finalizing approval of the following
elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan under
CAA section 110(k)(3):
1. The 2012 base year emission
inventories (CAA section 172(c)(3));
2. the demonstration that BACM,
including BACT, for the control of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will
be implemented no later than 4 years
after the area was reclassified (CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B));
3. the demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the Plan provides
for attainment as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than December
3307
31, 2019 (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and
189(b)(1)(A));
4. Plan provisions that require RFP
toward attainment by the applicable
date (CAA section 172(c)(2));
5. quantitative milestones that are to
be achieved every 3 years until the area
is redesignated attainment and that
demonstrate RFP toward attainment by
the applicable date (CAA section
189(c));
6. motor vehicle emissions budgets for
2017 and 2019, as shown in Table 1
(CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A); and
7. the inter-pollutant trading
mechanism provided in the 2016 PM2.5
Plan and clarified in a March 14, 2018
letter from the District, for use in
transportation conformity analyses for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.124.
TABLE 1—BUDGETS FOR THE SOUTH COAST FOR THE 2006 PM2.5 STANDARD
[Average annual tons per day]
2017 (RFP year)
Budgets ....................................................
We are also finalizing our proposal to
determine that the requirement for
contingency measures to be undertaken
if the area fails to make reasonable
further progress under CAA section
172(c)(9) is moot as applied to the 2017
milestone year because CARB and the
District have demonstrated to the EPA’s
satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met.
IV. 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 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
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Feb 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
2019 (attainment year)
PM2.5
NOX
VOC
PM2.5
NOX
VOC
21
200
99
20
169
83
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 CAA; and
• does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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).
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).
E:\FR\FM\12FER1.SGM
12FER1
3308
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
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 April 15, 2019.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 12, 2018.
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)(513)(ii)(B) to read
as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan—in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(513) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) South Coast Air Quality
Management District. (1) The following
portions of the ‘‘Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan (March 2017),’’
adopted March 3, 2017: Chapter 5
(‘‘PM2.5 Modeling Approach’’), pages 5–
17 through 5–27; Appendix III (‘‘Base
and Future Emission Inventory’’),
Attachment A (‘‘Annual Average
Emissions by Source Category in South
Coast Air Basin’’) for PM2.5, NOX, SO2,
VOC, and NH3 for years 2012, 2017,
2019, and 2020 and Attachment D,
tables D–1, D–3, D–7 and D–9;
Appendix IV–A (‘‘SCAQMD’s Stationary
and Mobile Source Control Measures’’),
Table IV–A–4 and section 2 (‘‘PM2.5
Control Measures’’); Appendix IV–C
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Feb 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
(‘‘Regional Transportation Strategy and
Control Measures’’), section IV (‘‘TCM
Best Available Control Measure (BACM)
Analysis for 2006 24-Hour and 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS’’); Appendix V
(‘‘Modeling and Attainment
Demonstration’’), Chapter 7 (‘‘24-hour
PM2.5 Demonstration’’) and Attachment
8 (‘‘24-hour Unmonitored Area Analysis
Supplement’’); Appendix VI–A
(‘‘Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM)/Best Available
Control Measures (BACM)
Demonstration’’), pages VI–A–13
through VI–A–42, Attachment VI–A–1
(‘‘Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations’’), Attachment VI–A–2
(‘‘Control Measure Assessment’’), and
Attachment VI–A–3 (‘‘California Mobile
Source Control Program Best Available
Control Measures/Reasonably Available
Control Measures Assessment’’);
Appendix VI–C (‘‘Reasonable Further
Progress (RFP) and Milestone Years’’),
pages VI–C–5 through VI–C–8, and
Attachment VI–C–1 (‘‘California
Existing Mobile Source Control
Program’’); Appendix VI–D (‘‘General
Conformity and Transportation
Conformity Budget’’), pages VI–D–2
through VI–D–6 and excluding tables
VI–D–1 through 3; and Appendix VI–F
(‘‘Precursor Requirements’’).
(2) Letter dated March 14, 2018 from
Philip Fine, Deputy Executive Officer,
Planning, Rule Development, and Area
Sources, South Coast Air Quality
Management District, to Amy Zimpfer,
Associate Director, Air Division, EPA
Region IX.
(3) Letter dated June 15, 2018 from
Philip Fine, Deputy Executive Officer,
Planning, Rule Development, and Area
Sources, South Coast Air Quality
Management District, to Amy Zimpfer,
Associate Director, Air Division, EPA
Region IX, regarding ‘‘Condensable and
Filterable Portions of PM2.5 Emissions in
the 2016 AQMD.’’
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–01922 Filed 2–11–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0194; FRL–9988–83–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AT70
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Leather
Finishing Operations Residual Risk
and Technology Review
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ACTION:
Final rule.
This action finalizes the
residual risk and technology review
(RTR) conducted for the Leather
Finishing Operations source category
regulated under national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP). In addition, we are taking
final action addressing startup,
shutdown, and malfunction (SSM),
electronic reporting, and clarification of
rule provisions. These final
amendments address emissions during
periods of SSM, add electronic
reporting, and revise certain rule
requirements and provisions. Although
these amendments will not reduce
emissions of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP), they are expected to improve
compliance and implementation of the
rule.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
February 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has established
a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0194. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed, 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 publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov, or in hard
copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA
WJC West Building, Room Number
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time,
Monday through Friday. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Docket Center is (202)
566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this final action, contact
Mr. Bill Schrock, Natural Resources
Group, Sector Policies and Programs
Division (E143–03), Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541–
5032; fax number: (919) 541–0516; and
email address: schrock.bill@epa.gov. For
specific information regarding the risk
modeling methodology, contact
Matthew Woody, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division (C539–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12FER1.SGM
12FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3305-3308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01922]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490; FRL-9988-60-Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
South Coast Serious Area Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
portions of a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by
California to address Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements for
the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the Los
Angeles-South Coast air basin (South Coast) Serious PM2.5
nonattainment area. The EPA is also approving 2017 and 2019 motor
vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes and
inter-pollutant trading ratios for use in transportation conformity
analyses.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 14, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. 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
publicly available 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415-
972-3964, Vagenas.Ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
[[Page 3306]]
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated levels of PM2.5 (particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less) and premature mortality.
Other important health effects associated with PM2.5
exposure include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease,
changes in lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms.
Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children.\1\
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a solid
or liquid particle (``primary PM2.5'' or ``direct
PM2.5'') or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions among precursor pollutants such as nitrogen
oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia
(``secondary PM2.5'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 78 FR 3086, 3088 (January 15, 2013).
\2\ 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA first established NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18,
1997.\3\ On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour NAAQS for
PM2.5 to provide increased protection of public health by
lowering the level from 65 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\)
to 35 [micro]g/m\3\.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 62 FR 38652. The initial NAAQS for PM2.5 included
annual standards of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations and 24-hour (daily)
standards of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 24-hour concentrations (40 CFR 50.7).
\4\ 40 CFR 50.13 and 71 FR 61144. In 2012, the EPA revised the
annual standards to lower them to 12 [micro]g/m\3\ (78 FR 3086
(January 15, 2013), codified at 40 CFR 50.18). Unless otherwise
noted, all references to the PM2.5 standards in this
notice are to the 2006 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ codified at
40 CFR 50.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, the EPA
designated the South Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standards.\5\ This designation became effective on
December 14, 2009.\6\ On June 2, 2014, the EPA classified the South
Coast area as ``Moderate'' nonattainment for both the 1997
PM2.5 standards and the 2006 PM2.5 standards
under subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 74 FR 58688.
\6\ 40 CFR 81.305.
\7\ 79 FR 31566. The EPA took this action in response to a
decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit finding that
the EPA had erred in implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS
pursuant solely to the general implementation provisions of subpart
1 of Part D, Title I of the Act, without also considering the
particulate matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of Part D.
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C.
Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 13, 2016, the EPA published a final rule reclassifying
the South Coast area as ``Serious'' nonattainment under subpart 4,
based on the EPA's determination that the area could not practicably
attain the 2006 PM2.5 standards by the Moderate area
attainment date, which was December 31, 2015.\8\ This reclassification
became effective on February 12, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 81 FR 1514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The local air district with primary responsibility for developing a
plan to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (``District'' or SCAQMD).
The District works cooperatively with the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) in preparing these plans. State authority for regulating
sources in the South Coast is split between the District, which has
responsibility for regulating stationary and most area sources, and
CARB, which has responsibility for regulating most mobile sources and
some categories of consumer products.
As a consequence of its reclassification as a Serious
PM2.5 nonattainment area, the South Coast became subject to
a new attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2) and to the
requirement to submit a Serious area plan that satisfies the
requirements of part D of title I of the Act, including the
requirements of subpart 4, for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\9\ As
explained in the EPA's final reclassification action, the Serious area
plan for the South Coast must include provisions to assure that the
best available control measures (BACM) for the control of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be implemented no
later than 4 years after the area is reclassified (CAA section
189(b)(1)(B)), and a demonstration (including air quality modeling)
that the plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 2019, which is the latest permissible
attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 81 FR 1514, 1518 (January 13, 2016).
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 3, 2018, we proposed to approve portions of a SIP
revision submitted by California to address CAA requirements for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in South Coast Serious
nonattainment area.\11\ The submitted SIP revision is the ``Final 2016
Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017),'' adopted by the SCAQMD
Governing Board on March 3, 2017 (``2016 PM2.5 Plan'' or
``Plan''). CARB submitted the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to the EPA on
April 27, 2017.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 83 FR 49872.
\12\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, with enclosures. Our proposed rule erroneously stated
that we were also proposing to act on CARB's ``2016 State Strategy
for the State Implementation Plan (March 2017),'' also submitted on
April 27, 2017. That submission, however, is not a necessary
component of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. See email dated November 15, 2018,
from Scott King, CARB, to Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, Subject:
``RE: question about SC 2006 PM2.5 Plan.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA proposed to approve the following portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan under CAA section 110(k)(3): The 2012 base year
emissions inventory, provisions assuring that BACM, including best
available control technology (BACT), for the control of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be implemented no
later than 4 years after the area was reclassified, the demonstration
(including air quality modeling) that the plan provides for attainment
as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2019,
provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP) toward
attainment by the applicable attainment date, quantitative milestones
that are to be achieved every 3 years until the area is redesignated
attainment and that demonstrate RFP, and 2017 and 2019 motor vehicle
emissions budgets.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 83 FR 49872.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also proposed to approve the inter-pollutant trading
mechanism provided in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and clarified in a
March 14, 2018 letter from the District, for use in transportation
conformity analyses for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.124. Finally, the EPA proposed to find that the
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area fails
to make reasonable further progress under CAA section 172(c)(9) is moot
as applied to the 2017 milestone year because the State and District
have demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met. The rationale for our proposed action is included in the
proposal and will not be restated here. We did not propose any action
on the attainment contingency measure component of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on November 2, 2018. During this comment period, we received
three
[[Page 3307]]
anonymous comments. Two of these commenters expressed criticism of a
political nature unrelated to this action specifically or to
environmental protection generally. The third commenter raised concerns
about the damage and risks associated with hydraulic fracturing
(commonly referred to as ``fracking''). Hydraulic fracturing is not
addressed in this action. After reviewing these comments, we have
concluded that they are outside the scope of our proposed action and
fail to identify any material issue necessitating a response. The
comments have been added to the docket for this action and are
accessible at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490.
III. Final Action
The EPA is taking final action to approve portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan submitted by the State of California to address
attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast
PM2.5 Serious nonattainment area. We are finalizing approval
of the following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan under CAA
section 110(k)(3):
1. The 2012 base year emission inventories (CAA section 172(c)(3));
2. the demonstration that BACM, including BACT, for the control of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be
implemented no later than 4 years after the area was reclassified (CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B));
3. the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the Plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2019 (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
4. Plan provisions that require RFP toward attainment by the
applicable date (CAA section 172(c)(2));
5. quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every 3 years
until the area is redesignated attainment and that demonstrate RFP
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
6. motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and 2019, as shown in
Table 1 (CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A); and
7. the inter-pollutant trading mechanism provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and clarified in a March 14, 2018 letter from the
District, for use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, in accordance with 40 CFR 93.124.
Table 1--Budgets for the South Coast for the 2006 PM2.5 Standard
[Average annual tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 (RFP year) 2019 (attainment year)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX VOC PM2.5 NOX VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budgets........................................... 21 200 99 20 169 83
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also finalizing our proposal to determine that the
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area fails
to make reasonable further progress under CAA section 172(c)(9) is moot
as applied to the 2017 milestone year because CARB and the District
have demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met.
IV. 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 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 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 CAA; and
does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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).
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).
[[Page 3308]]
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 April 15, 2019. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 12, 2018.
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)(513)(ii)(B) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(513) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) South Coast Air Quality Management District. (1) The following
portions of the ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (March
2017),'' adopted March 3, 2017: Chapter 5 (``PM2.5 Modeling
Approach''), pages 5-17 through 5-27; Appendix III (``Base and Future
Emission Inventory''), Attachment A (``Annual Average Emissions by
Source Category in South Coast Air Basin'') for PM2.5,
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 for years 2012, 2017,
2019, and 2020 and Attachment D, tables D-1, D-3, D-7 and D-9; Appendix
IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures''),
Table IV-A-4 and section 2 (``PM2.5 Control Measures'');
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures''), section IV (``TCM Best Available Control Measure (BACM)
Analysis for 2006 24-Hour and 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS'');
Appendix V (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration''), Chapter 7
(``24-hour PM2.5 Demonstration'') and Attachment 8 (``24-
hour Unmonitored Area Analysis Supplement''); Appendix VI-A
(``Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Best Available Control
Measures (BACM) Demonstration''), pages VI-A-13 through VI-A-42,
Attachment VI-A-1 (``Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations''),
Attachment VI-A-2 (``Control Measure Assessment''), and Attachment VI-
A-3 (``California Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control
Measures/Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment''); Appendix
VI-C (``Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestone Years''), pages
VI-C-5 through VI-C-8, and Attachment VI-C-1 (``California Existing
Mobile Source Control Program''); Appendix VI-D (``General Conformity
and Transportation Conformity Budget''), pages VI-D-2 through VI-D-6
and excluding tables VI-D-1 through 3; and Appendix VI-F (``Precursor
Requirements'').
(2) Letter dated March 14, 2018 from Philip Fine, Deputy Executive
Officer, Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, South Coast Air
Quality Management District, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX.
(3) Letter dated June 15, 2018 from Philip Fine, Deputy Executive
Officer, Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, South Coast Air
Quality Management District, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX, regarding ``Condensable and Filterable
Portions of PM2.5 Emissions in the 2016 AQMD.''
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-01922 Filed 2-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
