Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California; Coachella Valley; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Requirements, 2949-2974 [2020-00538]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2044, and as
noted in specific sections.
■
5. Revise § 62.62 to read as follows:
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 62.62
Faith-Based Organizations
(a) Organizations that are faith-based
are eligible, on the same basis as any
other organization, to participate in the
Supportive Services for Veteran
Families Program under this part.
Decisions about awards of Federal
financial assistance must be free from
political interference or even the
appearance of such interference and
must be made on the basis of merit, not
on the basis of religion or religious
belief or lack thereof.
(b)(1) No organization may use direct
financial assistance from VA under this
part to pay for any of the following:
(i) Explicitly religious activities such
as, religious worship, instruction, or
proselytization; or
(ii) Equipment or supplies to be used
for any of those activities.
(2) For purposes of this section,
‘‘Indirect financial assistance’’ means
Federal financial assistance in which a
service provider receives program funds
through a voucher, certificate,
agreement or other form of
disbursement, as a result of the genuine,
independent choice of a private
beneficiary. ‘‘Direct Federal financial
assistance’’ means Federal financial
assistance received by an entity selected
by the government or a pass-through
entity as defined in 38 CFR 50.1(d) to
provide or carry out a service (e.g., by
contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement). References to ‘‘financial
assistance’’ will be deemed to be
references to direct Federal financial
assistance, unless the referenced
assistance meets the definition of
‘‘indirect Federal financial assistance’’
in this paragraph.
(c) Organizations that engage in
explicitly religious activities, such as
worship, religious instruction, or
proselytization, must offer those
services separately in time or location
from any programs or services funded
with direct financial assistance from VA
under this part, and participation in any
of the organization’s explicitly religious
activities must be voluntary for the
beneficiaries of a program or service
funded by direct financial assistance
from VA under this part.
(d) A faith-based organization that
participates in the Supportive Services
for Veteran Families Program under this
part will retain its independence from
Federal, state, or local governments and
may continue to carry out its mission,
including the definition, practice and
expression of its religious beliefs,
provided that it does not use direct
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
financial assistance from VA under this
part to support any explicitly religious
activities, such as worship, religious
instruction, or proselytization. Among
other things, faith-based organizations
may use space in their facilities to
provide VA-funded services under this
part, without concealing, removing, or
altering religious art, icons, scripture, or
other religious symbols. In addition, a
VA-funded faith-based organization
retains its authority over its internal
governance, and it may retain religious
terms in its organization’s name, select
its board members and otherwise govern
itself on a religious basis, and include
religious reference in its organization’s
mission statements and other governing
documents.
(e) An organization that participates
in a VA program under this part shall
not, in providing direct program
assistance, discriminate against a
program beneficiary or prospective
program beneficiary regarding housing,
supportive services, or technical
assistance, on the basis of religion or
religious belief.
(f) If a state or local government
voluntarily contributes its own funds to
supplement Federally funded activities,
the state or local government has the
option to segregate the Federal funds or
commingle them. However, if the funds
are commingled, this provision applies
to all of the commingled funds.
(g) To the extent otherwise permitted
by Federal law, the restrictions on
explicitly religious activities set forth in
this section do not apply where VA
funds are provided to faith-based
organizations through indirect
assistance as a result of a genuine and
independent private choice of a
beneficiary, provided the faith-based
organizations otherwise satisfy the
requirements of this part. A faith-based
organization may receive such funds as
the result of a beneficiary’s genuine and
independent choice if, for example, a
beneficiary redeems a voucher, coupon,
or certificate, allowing the beneficiary to
direct where funds are to be paid, or a
similar funding mechanism provided to
that beneficiary and designed to give
that beneficiary a choice among
providers.
[FR Doc. 2019–26756 Filed 1–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2949
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0241; FRL–10003–
99–Region 9]
Approval of Air Quality Implementation
Plans; California; Coachella Valley;
2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve,
or conditionally approve, all or portions
of two state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
California to meet Clean Air Act
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) in the
Coachella Valley ozone nonattainment
area (‘‘Coachella Valley’’). The two SIP
revisions include the portions of the
‘‘Final 2016 Air Quality Management
Plan’’ and the ‘‘2018 Updates to the
California State Implementation Plan’’
that address ozone in the Coachella
Valley. These submittals address the
nonattainment area requirements for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including
the requirements for an emissions
inventory, emissions statements,
attainment demonstration, reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonably
available control measures, contingency
measures, and motor vehicle emissions
budgets. The EPA is proposing to
approve these submittals as meeting all
the applicable ozone nonattainment area
requirements except for the contingency
measure requirements, for which the
EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve the RFP contingency measures
and to defer action on the attainment
contingency measure.
DATES: Any comments must be
submitted by February 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2019–0241 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2950
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office (AIR–2),
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972–
3963, or by email at ungvarsky.john@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations
and SIPs
B. The Coachella Valley 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area
C. Clean Air Act and Regulatory
Requirements for 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs
II. Submissions From the State of California
To Address 2008 Ozone Requirements in
the Coachella Valley
A. Summary of Submissions
B. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements
for Adoption and Submission of SIP
Revisions
III. Review of the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP
A. Emissions Inventories
B. Emissions Statement
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures
Demonstration and Control Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration
E. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable
Further Progress Demonstration
F. Transportation Control Strategies and
Measures To Offset Emissions Increases
From Vehicle Miles Traveled
G. Contingency Measures
H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
I. Other Clean Air Act Requirements
Applicable to Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations
and SIPs
Ground-level ozone pollution is
formed from the reaction of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) in the presence of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
sunlight.1 These two pollutants, referred
to as ozone precursors, are emitted by
many types of sources, including onand off-road motor vehicles and
engines, power plants and industrial
facilities, and smaller area sources such
as lawn and garden equipment and
paints.
Scientific evidence indicates that
adverse public health effects occur
following exposure to ozone,
particularly in children and adults with
lung disease. Breathing air containing
ozone can reduce lung function and
inflame airways, which can increase
respiratory symptoms and aggravate
asthma or other lung diseases.2
Under section 109 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or ‘‘the Act’’), the EPA
promulgates NAAQS for pervasive air
pollutants, such as ozone. The NAAQS
are concentration levels that the
attainment and maintenance of which
the EPA has determined to be requisite
to protect public health and welfare.
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
the CAA to designate areas throughout
the nation as either attaining or not
attaining the standards.
On February 8, 1979, under section
109 of the CAA, the EPA established
primary and secondary NAAQS for
ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm)
averaged over a 1-hour period.3 On July
18, 1997, the EPA revised the primary
and secondary standards for ozone to set
the acceptable level of ozone in the
ambient air at 0.08 ppm averaged over
an 8-hour period (‘‘1997 ozone
NAAQS’’).4
In 2008, the EPA lowered the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm (‘‘2008
ozone NAAQS’’) to replace the 1997
ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.5 In 2012,
the EPA designated the Coachella Valley
as nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS and classified the area as
1 The State of California refers to reactive organic
gases (ROG) in some of its ozone-related SIP
submissions. As a practical matter, ROG and VOC
refer to the same set of chemical constituents, and
for the sake of simplicity, we refer to this set of
gases as VOC in this proposed rule.
2 ‘‘Fact Sheet—2008 Final Revisions to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone,’’ dated March 2008.
3 See 44 FR 8202.
4 See 62 FR 38856. On April 30, 2004, the EPA
designated and classified areas of the country with
respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR
23858. On July 10, 2019, the EPA granted a request
from the State of California to reclassify the
Coachella Valley ozone nonattainment area from
‘‘Severe-15’’ to ‘‘Extreme’’ for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. See 84 FR 32841.
5 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). The EPA further
tightened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm
in 2015, but this proposed action relates to the
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Information on the 2015 ozone NAAQS is available
at 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘Severe-15.’’ 6 Areas classified as
Severe-15 must attain the NAAQS
within 15 years of the effective date of
the nonattainment designation.7
Designations of nonattainment for a
given NAAQS trigger requirements
under the CAA to prepare and submit
SIP revisions. The SIP revisions that are
the subject of today’s proposed action
address the Severe-15 nonattainment
area requirements that apply to the
Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
Under California law, the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) is the state
agency that is responsible for the
adoption and submission to the EPA of
California SIPs and SIP revisions, and it
has broad authority to establish
emissions standards and other
requirements for mobile sources. Local
and regional air pollution control
districts in California are responsible for
the regulation of stationary sources and
are generally responsible for the
development of regional air quality
management plans (AQMPs or ‘‘plans’’).
In the Coachella Valley, the South Coast
Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD or ‘‘District’’) develops and
adopts AQMPs to address CAA
planning requirements applicable to
that region. Such plans are then
submitted to CARB for adoption and
submittal to the EPA as revisions to the
California SIP.
B. The Coachella Valley 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area
The Coachella Valley is located
within Riverside County, and its
boundaries generally align with the
Riverside County portion of the Salton
Sea Air Basin (SSAB). For a precise
description of the geographic
boundaries of the Coachella Valley, see
40 CFR 81.305.
Prior AQMPs and state control
measures developed by the District and
CARB have produced significant
emissions reductions over the years and
improved air quality in the Coachella
Valley. For instance, the 8-hour ozone
design value for the Coachella Valley
decreased from 0.110 ppm to 0.088 ppm
from 1995 to 2015, despite increases in
population and vehicular activity.8
The Coachella Valley is downwind
from the South Coast Air Basin (‘‘South
6 77
FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
section 181(a)(1), 40 CFR 51.1102 and
51.1103(a).
8 2016 AQMP, Appendix II (‘‘Current Air
Quality’’), Table A–8. For the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the design value at any given monitoring
site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air
quality ozone concentration. The maximum design
value among the various ozone monitoring sites is
the design value for the area.
7 CAA
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Coast’’) and is subject to significant
transport of ozone from that area; both
ozone nonattainment areas are regulated
by the SCAQMD. The Final 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan describes
ozone transport from the South Coast as
follows:
Atmospheric ozone in the Riverside county
portion of the SSAB is both directly
transported from the Basin and formed
photochemically from precursors emitted
upwind. The precursors are emitted in
greatest quantity in the coastal and central
Los Angeles County areas of the Basin. The
Basin’s prevailing sea breeze causes polluted
air to be transported inland. As the air is
being transported inland, ozone is formed,
with peak concentrations occurring in the
inland valleys of the Basin, extending from
eastern San Fernando Valley through the San
Gabriel Valley into the Riverside-San
Bernardino area and the adjacent mountains.
As the air is transported still further inland
into the Coachella Valley through the San
Gorgonio Pass, ozone concentrations
typically decrease due to dilution, although
ozone standards can still be exceeded.9
Because of the transport from the
South Coast into the Coachella Valley,
continued progress in the South Coast
towards meeting the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS is critical for the
Coachella Valley to attain the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Clean Air Act and Regulatory
Requirements for 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs
States must implement the 2008
ozone NAAQS under title I, part D of
the CAA, including sections 171–179B
of subpart 1 (‘‘Nonattainment Areas in
General’’) and sections 181–185 of
subpart 2 (‘‘Additional Provisions for
Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’). To assist
states in developing effective plans to
address ozone nonattainment problems,
in 2015, the EPA issued a SIP
Requirements Rule (SRR) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS (‘‘2008 Ozone SRR’’) that
addressed implementation of the 2008
standards, including attainment dates,
requirements for emissions inventories,
attainment and reasonable further
progress (RFP) demonstrations, among
other SIP elements, as well as the
transition from the 1997 ozone NAAQS
to the 2008 ozone NAAQS and
associated anti-backsliding
requirements.10 The regulatory
requirements of the 2008 Ozone SRR are
9 ‘‘Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan,’’
SCAQMD, March 2017, 7–9. See also 2007 AQMP,
7–23 (describing ozone transport through the San
Gorgonio Pass and citing early studies documenting
this transport).
10 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Anti-backsliding
requirements are the provisions applicable to
revoked NAAQS (including the 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS and the 1997 ozone NAAQS) as described
in CAA section 172(e).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart AA.
We discuss the CAA and regulatory
planning requirements for the elements
of 2008 ozone plans relevant to this
proposal in more detail below.
The EPA’s 2008 Ozone SRR was
challenged, and on February 16, 2018,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit (‘‘D.C. Circuit’’) published its
decision in South Coast Air Quality
Management District v. EPA (‘‘South
Coast II’’) 11 vacating portions of the
2008 Ozone SRR. The only aspect of the
South Coast II decision that affects this
proposed action is the vacatur of the
alternative baseline year for RFP. More
specifically, the 2008 Ozone SRR
required states to develop the baseline
emissions inventory for RFP using the
emissions for the most recent calendar
year for which states submit a triennial
inventory to the EPA under subpart A
(‘‘Air Emissions Reporting
Requirements’’) of 40 CFR part 51,
which was 2011. However, the 2008
Ozone SRR allowed states to use an
alternative year, between 2008 and
2012, for the baseline emissions
inventory provided that the state
demonstrated why the alternative
baseline year was appropriate. In the
South Coast II decision, the D.C. Circuit
vacated the provisions of the 2008
Ozone SRR that allowed states to use an
alternative baseline year for
demonstrating RFP.
II. Submissions From the State of
California To Address 2008 Ozone
Requirements in the Coachella Valley
A. Summary of Submissions
In this document, we are proposing
action on portions of two SIP revisions
that are described in detail in the
following paragraphs. Collectively, we
refer to the relevant portions of the two
SIP revisions as the ‘‘2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP.’’
1. SCAQMD’s 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan
On April 27, 2017, CARB submitted
the Final 2016 Air Quality Management
Plan (March 2017) (‘‘2016 AQMP’’) to
the EPA as a revision to the California
SIP.12 The 2016 AQMP addresses the
nonattainment area requirements for the
11 South Coast Air Quality Management District v.
EPA, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). The term
‘‘South Coast II’’ is used in reference to the 2018
court decision to distinguish it from a decision
published in 2006 also referred to as ‘‘South Coast.’’
The earlier decision involved a challenge to the
EPA’s Phase 1 implementation rule for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. South Coast Air Quality
Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir.
2006).
12 Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2951
South Coast for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the 2006 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS, and the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, and for the Coachella
Valley for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. It also updates the approved
attainment demonstrations for the 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS and 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the South Coast and
adds new measures to reduce the
reliance on section 182(e)(5) new
technology measures to attain those
standards. On October 1, 2019, the EPA
approved portions of the 2016 AQMP
and other submittals (collectively
referred to as the ‘‘2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP’’) 13 with respect to
numerous requirements for the South
Coast relating to the 1979 1-hour, 1997
8-hour, and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.14 In today’s notice, we are
proposing action on the portions of the
2016 AQMP that address the 2008 ozone
NAAQS for the Coachella Valley.
The SIP revision for the 2016 AQMP
includes the various chapters and
appendices of the 2016 AQMP,
described further below, plus the
District’s resolution of adoption for the
plan (District Resolution 17–2) and
CARB’s resolution of adoption of the
2016 AQMP as a revision to the
California SIP (CARB Resolution 17–8)
that includes commitments on which
the 2016 AQMP relies.15 With respect to
ozone, the 2016 AQMP addresses the
CAA requirements for emissions
inventories, air quality modeling
demonstrating attainment, reasonably
available control measures (RACM),
RFP, transportation control strategies
and measures, and contingency
measures for failure to make RFP,
among other requirements.
The 2016 AQMP is organized into
eleven chapters. Most of the 2016
AQMP is directly relevant to the ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast,
and our review for this action addresses
only those portions of the 2016 AQMP
that address the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
13 The 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP includes five
submittals: The 2016 AQMP, the ‘‘Revised Proposed
2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation
Plan,’’ the ‘‘2018 Updates to the California State
Implementation Plan,’’ the ‘‘Updated Federal 1979
1-Hour Ozone Standard Attainment
Demonstration,’’ and a SCAQMD emissions
statement rule.
14 84 FR 52005. The EPA’s proposed approval of
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP is at 84 FR 28132
(June 17, 2019). On February 12, 2019, we approved
portions of the 2016 AQMP with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS (except for the related contingency
measure element). See 84 FR 3305.
15 SCAQMD Board Resolution 17–2, March 3,
2017; CARB Board Resolution 17–8, 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan for Ozone and PM2.5 in
the South Coast and the Coachella Valley, March
23, 2017.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2952
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
the Coachella Valley.16 The Coachella
Valley is located in the SSAB, which is
separate from the upwind South Coast
and faces different air quality
challenges. Chapter 7, ‘‘Current and
Future Air Quality—Desert
Nonattainment Areas SIP’’ of the 2016
AQMP addresses CAA requirements for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley.
Additional chapters in the 2016
AQMP also discuss the Coachella Valley
and provide relevant background.
Chapter 1, ‘‘Introduction,’’ introduces
the 2016 AQMP, including its purpose,
historical air quality progress in the
South Coast and Coachella Valley, and
the District’s approach to air quality
planning. Chapter 2, ‘‘Air Quality and
Health Effects,’’ discusses current air
quality in comparison with federal
health-based air pollution standards.
Chapter 4, ‘‘Control Strategy and
Implementation,’’ presents the control
strategy, specific measures, and
implementation schedules to attain the
air quality standards by the specified
attainment dates. Chapter 5, ‘‘Future Air
Quality,’’ describes the modeling and
modeled attainment demonstration.
Chapter 6, ‘‘Federal and State Clean Air
Act Requirements,’’ discusses specific
federal and state requirements,
including anti-backsliding requirements
for revoked standards. Chapter 11,
‘‘Public Process and Participation,’’
describes the District’s public outreach
effort associated with the development
of the 2016 AQMP. A glossary is
provided at the end of the document,
presenting definitions of commonly
used terms found in the 2016 AQMP.
The 2016 AQMP also includes the
following technical appendices:
• Appendix I (‘‘Health Effects’’)
presents a summary of scientific
findings on the health effects of ambient
air pollutants.
• Appendix II (‘‘Current Air Quality’’)
contains a detailed summary of the air
quality in 2015, along with prior year
16 The following chapters or portions thereof in
the 2016 AQMP were submitted for information
only and are not subject to review as part of the SIP
revision: The portion of Chapter 6 that is titled
‘‘California Clean Air Act Requirements’’ and that
discusses compliance with state law requirements
for clean air plans; Chapter 8, ‘‘Looking Beyond
Current Requirements,’’ assesses the South Coast’s
status with respect to the 2015 8-hour ozone
standard of 0.070 ppm; Chapter 9, ‘‘Air Toxic
Control Strategy,’’ examines the ongoing efforts to
reduce health risk from toxic air contaminants, cobenefits from reducing criteria pollutants, and
potential future actions; and Chapter 10, ‘‘Climate
and Energy,’’ provides a description of current and
projected energy demand and supply issues in the
South Coast, and the relationship between air
quality improvement and greenhouse gas mitigation
goals. As noted previously, we are not taking action
in this rulemaking on the portions of the 2016
AQMP that relate only to the South Coast.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
trends, in both the South Coast and the
Coachella Valley.
• Appendix III (‘‘Base and Future
Year Emission Inventory’’) presents the
2012 base year emissions inventory and
projected emission inventories of air
pollutants in future attainment years for
both annual average and summer
planning inventories in the South Coast.
• Appendix IV–A (‘‘SCAQMD’s
Stationary and Mobile Source Control
Measures’’) describes SCAQMD’s
proposed stationary and mobile source
control measures to attain the federal
ozone and PM2.5 standards.
• Appendix IV–B (‘‘CARB’s Mobile
Source Strategy’’) describes CARB’s
proposed 2016 strategy to attain healthbased federal air quality standards.
• Appendix IV–C (‘‘Regional
Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures’’) describes the Southern
California Association of Governments’
(SCAG) ‘‘Final 2016–2040 Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy’’ (2016 RTP/SCS)
and transportation control measures.
• Appendix V (‘‘Modeling and
Attainment Demonstrations’’) provides
the details of the regional modeling for
the attainment demonstration.
• Appendix VI (‘‘Compliance with
Other Clean Air Act Requirements’’)
provides the District’s demonstration
that the 2016 AQMP complies with
specific CAA requirements.
Attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
in the Coachella Valley is heavily
dependent on emission reductions
occurring in the adjacent South Coast.
The emission reductions in the South
Coast are described in the 2016 South
Coast Ozone SIP. As discussed in
section III.D (Attainment
Demonstration) of the EPA’s proposed
approval of the 2016 South Coast Ozone
SIP,17 the ozone attainment
demonstrations for the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS include commitments
made by the District in the 2016 AQMP
and by CARB in the ‘‘Revised Proposed
2016 State Strategy for the State
Implementation Plan’’ (March 7, 2017)
(‘‘2016 State Strategy’’). The 2016 State
Strategy does not include specific
commitments for the Coachella Valley.
For details on the District and CARB
emissions reduction commitments in
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP, see the
EPA’s June 17, 2019 proposed approval
action at 84 FR 28132.
2. CARB’s 2018 Updates to the
California State Implementation Plan
On December 5, 2018, CARB
submitted the 2018 Updates to the
17 84 FR 28132 (June 17, 2019). On October 1,
2019, the EPA finalized its approval of the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP. See 84 FR 52005.
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
California State Implementation Plan
(‘‘2018 SIP Update’’) to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP.18 CARB
adopted the 2018 SIP Update on
October 25, 2018. CARB developed the
2018 SIP Update in response to the
court’s decision in South Coast II
vacating the 2008 Ozone SRR with
respect to the use of an alternate
baseline year for demonstrating RFP,
and to address contingency measure
requirements in the wake of the court
decision in Bahr v. EPA.19 The 2018 SIP
Update includes updates for 8 different
California ozone nonattainment areas.
We previously approved the San
Joaquin Valley and South Coast portions
of the 2018 SIP Update.20 The 2018 SIP
Update includes an RFP demonstration
using the required 2011 baseline year
for the Coachella Valley for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.21
The 2018 SIP Update also includes
updated motor vehicle emissions
budgets and information to support the
contingency measure element. To
supplement the contingency measures
element of the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP, the District has committed
by letter to modify an existing rule or
adopt a new rule to create a contingency
measure that will be triggered if the area
fails to meet an RFP milestone or attain
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.22 CARB
transmitted the District’s letter to the
EPA and committed to submit the
revised District rule to the EPA as a SIP
revision within 12 months of the EPA’s
final action on the contingency measure
element of the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP.23
18 Letter dated December 5, 2018, from Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
19 Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 2016). In
this case, the court rejected the EPA’s longstanding
interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9) as allowing
for early implementation of contingency measures.
The court concluded that a contingency measure
must take effect at the time the area fails to make
RFP or attain by the applicable attainment date, not
before.
20 84 FR 11198 (March 25, 2019) (final approval
of the San Joaquin Valley portion of the 2018 SIP
Update) and 84 FR 52005 (October 1, 2019) (final
approval of the South Coast portion of the 2018 SIP
Update).
21 Because we understand the State intended the
RFP demonstration for the Coachella Valley in the
2018 SIP Update to replace the prior RFP
demonstration in the 2016 AQMP submitted in
April 2017, we plan no further action on the RFP
demonstration for Coachella Valley in the 2016
AQMP.
22 Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne
Nastri, SCAQMD Executive Officer, to Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB.
23 Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Michael
Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality and Science Division,
CARB, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
B. Clean Air Act Procedural
Requirements for Adoption and
Submission of SIP Revisions
CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l)
require a state to provide reasonable
public notice and opportunity for public
hearing prior to the adoption and
submission of a SIP or SIP revision. To
meet this requirement, every SIP
submittal should include evidence that
adequate public notice was given and an
opportunity for a public hearing was
provided consistent with the EPA’s
implementing regulations in 40 CFR
51.102.
Both the District and CARB have
satisfied the applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable
public notice and hearing prior to the
adoption and submittal of the SIP
revisions that compose the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. With
respect to the 2016 AQMP, the District
held six regional workshops from July
14 through July 21, 2016, and four
regional hearings on November 15 and
17, 2016, to discuss the plan and solicit
public input.24 On December 19 and 20,
2016, the District published notices in
several local newspapers of a public
hearing to be held on February 3, 2017,
for the adoption of the 2016 AQMP.25
On February 3, 2017, the District held
the public hearing, and on March 3,
2017, through Resolution 17–2, the
District adopted the 2016 AQMP and
directed the Executive Officer to
forward the plan to CARB for inclusion
in the California SIP.
CARB also provided public notice and
opportunity for public comment on the
2016 AQMP. On March 6, 2017, CARB
released for public review its Staff
Report for the 2016 AQMP and
published a notice of public meeting to
be held on March 23, 2017, to consider
adoption of the 2016 AQMP.26 On
March 23, 2017, CARB held the hearing
and adopted the 2016 AQMP as a
revision to the California SIP, excluding
those portions not required to be
submitted to the EPA, and directed the
Executive Officer to submit the 2016
AQMP to the EPA for approval into the
California SIP.27 On April 27, 2017, the
Executive Officer of CARB submitted
24 See
2016 AQMP, Table 11–2.
dated January 24, 2017, from
Denise Garzaro, Clerk of the Boards, SCAQMD to
Arlene Martinez, Administrative Secretary,
Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources,
SCAQMD. The memorandum includes copies of the
proofs of publication of the notice for the February
3, 2017 public hearing.
26 Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Adopting
the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan for Ozone
and PM2.5 for the South Coast Air Basin and the
Coachella Valley signed by Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, March 6, 2017.
27 CARB Resolution 17–8, 10.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
25 Memorandum
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
the 2016 AQMP to the EPA and
included the transcript of the hearing
held on March 23, 2017.28 On October
23, 2017, the EPA determined that the
portions of this submittal applicable to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS were
complete.29
With respect to the 2018 SIP Update,
CARB also provided public notice and
opportunity for public comment. On
September 21, 2018, CARB released for
public review the 2018 SIP Update and
published notice of a public meeting to
be held on October 23, 2018, to consider
adoption of the 2018 SIP Update.30 On
October 23, 2018, through Resolution
18–50, CARB adopted the 2018 SIP
Update. On December 5, 2018, CARB
submitted the 2018 SIP Update to the
EPA.
Based on information provided in
each of the SIP revisions summarized
above, the EPA has determined that all
hearings were properly noticed.
Therefore, we find that the submittals of
the 2016 AQMP and the 2018 SIP
Update meet the procedural
requirements for public notice and
hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and
110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102.
III. Review of the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1)
require states to submit for each ozone
nonattainment area a ‘‘base year
inventory’’ that is a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual
emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant or pollutants in the
area. In addition, the 2008 Ozone SRR
requires that the inventory year be
selected consistent with the baseline
year for the RFP demonstration, which
is the most recent calendar year for
which a complete triennial inventory is
required to be submitted to the EPA
under the Air Emissions Reporting
Requirements.31
The EPA has issued guidance on the
development of base year and future
year emissions inventories for 8-hour
28 Transcript of the March 23, 2017 Meeting of the
State of California Air Resources Board.
29 Letter dated October 23, 2017, from Matthew J.
Lakin, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX
to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB.
30 Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the 2018
Updates to the California State Implementation Plan
signed by Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB,
September 21, 2018.
31 2008 Ozone SRR at 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and the
Air Emissions Reporting Requirements at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart A.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2953
ozone and other pollutants.32 Emissions
inventories for ozone must include
emissions of VOC and NOX and
represent emissions for a typical ozone
season weekday.33 States should
include documentation explaining how
the emissions data were calculated. In
estimating mobile source emissions,
states should use the latest emissions
models and planning assumptions
available at the time the SIP is
developed.34
Future baseline emissions inventories
must reflect the most recent population,
employment, travel and congestion
estimates for the area. In this context,
‘‘baseline’’ emissions inventories refer
to emissions estimates for a given year
and area that reflect rules and
regulations and other measures that are
already adopted. Future baseline
emissions inventories are necessary to
show the projected effectiveness of SIP
control measures. Both the base year
and future year inventories are
necessary for photochemical modeling
to demonstrate attainment.
2. Summary of State’s Submission
The 2016 AQMP includes a summary
of the base year (2012) and future year
annual average baseline inventories for
NOX and VOC for the Coachella Valley.
Documentation for the inventories is
found in Chapter 7 and Appendix III of
the 2016 AQMP. Additionally, the
District provided the EPA with
supplemental documentation (‘‘2016
AQMP Inventory Supplement’’) for the
2012 and 2026 ozone season inventories
relied on in the 2016 AQMP.35 The 2018
SIP Update provides detailed NOX and
VOC inventories for 2011 (the base year
used for RFP) and 2012, and projected
inventories for 2017, 2020, 2023, 2026,
and 2027. Because ozone levels in the
Coachella Valley are typically higher
from May through October, the
32 ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations,’’ EPA–454/B–17–
002, May 2017. At the time the 2016 AQMP was
developed, the following EPA emissions inventory
guidance applied: ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance
for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations’’ EPA–454–R–05–
001, November 2005.
33 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and (c), and 40 CFR
51.1100(bb) and (cc).
34 80 FR 12264, 12290 (March 6, 2015).
35 Email dated June 28, 2019, from Zorik
Pirveysian, SCAQMD, to John Ungvarsky, EPA,
Subject: ‘‘RE: Coachella Valley ozone inventory
clarification and update on possible contingency
measures.’’ The 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement
consists of two attachments to this email, which
provide the detailed 2012 and 2026 ozone season
inventories that were used for the summary in the
2016 AQMP. The inventories were generated on
November 30, 2016.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2954
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
inventories in the 2016 AQMP
Inventory Supplement and the 2018 SIP
Update represent average summer day
emissions. The inventories in the 2016
AQMP Inventory Supplement and 2018
SIP Update reflect District rules adopted
prior to December 2015 and CARB rules
adopted by November 2015. For
estimating on-road motor vehicle
emissions, these inventories use
EMFAC2014, the EPA-approved version
of California’s mobile source emissions
model available at the time the 2016
AQMP and 2018 SIP Update were
developed.36
The VOC and NOX emissions
estimates are grouped into two general
categories, stationary sources and
mobile sources. Stationary sources are
further divided into ‘‘point’’ and ‘‘area’’
sources. Point sources typically refer to
permitted facilities and have one or
more identified and fixed pieces of
equipment and emissions points. Area
sources consist of widespread and
numerous smaller emissions sources,
such as small permitted facilities and
households. The mobile sources
category is divided into two major
subcategories, ‘‘on-road’’ and ‘‘off-road’’
mobile sources. On-road mobile sources
include light-duty automobiles, light-,
medium-, and heavy-duty trucks, and
motorcycles. Off-road mobile sources
include aircraft, locomotives,
construction equipment, mobile
equipment, and recreational vehicles.
Point source emissions for the 2012
base year emissions inventory are
calculated using reported data from
facilities using the District’s annual
emissions reporting program, which
applies under District Rule 301
(‘‘Permitting and Associated Fees’’) to
stationary sources in the Coachella
Valley that emit 4 tons per year (tpy) or
more of VOC or NOX. Area sources
include smaller emissions sources
distributed across the nonattainment
area. CARB and the District estimate
emissions for about 400 area source
categories using established inventory
methods, including publicly-available
emissions factors and activity
information. Activity data are derived
from national survey data such as the
Energy Information Administration or
from local sources such as the Southern
California Gas Company, paint
suppliers, and District databases.
Emissions factors used for the estimates
come from a number of sources
including source tests, compliance
reports, and the EPA’s compilation of
emissions factor document known as
‘‘AP–42.’’
On-road emissions inventories in the
2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement are
calculated using CARB’s EMFAC2014
model and the travel activity data
provided by SCAG in the 2016 RTP/
SCS.37 CARB provided emissions
inventories for off-road equipment,
including construction and mining
equipment, industrial and commercial
equipment, lawn and garden equipment,
agricultural equipment, ocean-going
vessels, commercial harbor craft,
locomotives, cargo handling equipment,
pleasure craft, and recreational vehicles.
CARB uses several models to estimate
emissions for more than one hundred
off-road equipment categories.38 Aircraft
emissions inventories are developed in
conjunction with the airports in the
region.
Table 1 provides a summary of the
District’s 2012 base year and 2026
attainment year baseline emissions
estimates in tons per average summer
day for NOX and VOC. These
inventories provide the basis for the
control measure analysis and the
attainment demonstrations in the 2016
AQMP. Based on the inventory for 2012,
stationary and area sources currently
account for 39 percent of the VOC
emissions and less than 5 percent of the
NOX emissions in the Coachella Valley
while mobile sources account for 61
percent of the VOC emissions and over
95 percent of the NOX emissions. For a
more detailed discussion of the
methodologies used to develop the
inventories, see Appendix III of the
2016 AQMP.
TABLE 1—COACHELLA VALLEY BASE YEAR AND ATTAINMENT YEAR BASELINE EMISSIONS INVENTORIES
[Summer planning inventory, tons per day (tpd)]
2012
2026
Category
VOC
NOX
NOX
VOC
Stationary and Area Sources ..........................................................................
On-Road Mobile Sources ................................................................................
Off-Road Mobile Sources ................................................................................
1.2
18.9
6.5
6.4
6.4
3.7
1.4
4.1
3.6
8.8
2.9
3.3
Total ..........................................................................................................
26.6
16.5
9.1
15.1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Sources: 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement and 2018 SIP Update, Table VII–1. The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total due
to rounding of the numbers.
Future emissions forecasts are
primarily based on demographic and
economic growth projections provided
by SCAG, and control factors developed
by the District in reference to the 2012
base year. Growth factors used to project
these baseline inventories are derived
mainly from data obtained from
SCAG.39
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
We have reviewed the 2012 base year
emissions inventory in the 2016 AQMP
Inventory Supplement and the
inventory methodologies used by the
District and CARB for consistency with
CAA requirements and EPA guidance.
First, we find that the 2012 inventory
includes estimates for VOC and NOX for
a typical ozone season weekday, and
that CARB has provided adequate
documentation explaining how the
emissions are calculated. Second, we
find that the 2012 base year emissions
inventory in the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement reflects appropriate
36 EMFAC is short for EMission FACtor. The EPA
announced the availability of the EMFAC2014
model for use in state implementation plan
development and transportation conformity in
California on December 14, 2015. 80 FR 77337. The
EPA’s approval of the EMFAC2014 emissions
model for SIP and conformity purposes was
effective on the date of publication of the notice in
the Federal Register. On August 15, 2019, the EPA
approved and announced the availability of
EMFAC2017, the latest update to the EMFAC model
for use by State and local governments to meet CAA
requirements. See 84 FR 41717.
37 See https://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/
FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. SCAG is the metropolitan
planning organization for the Coachella Valley and
surrounding areas. The SCAG region encompasses
six counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura) and 191
cities in an area covering more than 38,000 square
miles.
38 2016 AQMP, Appendix III, page III–1–24.
39 2016 AQMP, 7–25, and Appendix III, page III–
2–6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
emissions models and methodologies,
and, therefore, represents a
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions during
that year in the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area. Third, we find that
selection of year 2012 for the base year
emissions inventory is appropriate
because it is consistent with the 2011
RFP baseline year (from the 2018 SIP
Update) because both inventories are
derived from a common set of models
and methods. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to approve the 2012
emissions inventory in the 2016 AQMP
Inventory Supplement as meeting the
requirements for a base year inventory
set forth in CAA section 182(a)(1) and
40 CFR 51.1115.40
With respect to the 2026 attainment
year baseline projections, we have
reviewed the growth and control factors
and find them acceptable and conclude
that the future baseline emissions
projections in the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement reflect appropriate
calculation methods and the latest
planning assumptions. Also, as a
general matter, the EPA will approve a
SIP revision that takes emissions
reduction credit for a control measure
only where the EPA has approved the
measure as part of the SIP. Thus, to take
credit for the emissions reductions from
newly-adopted or amended District
rules for stationary sources, the related
rules must be approved by the EPA into
the SIP. Table 2 in the technical support
document (TSD) accompanying this
rulemaking shows District rules with
post-2012 compliance dates that were
incorporated in the future year
inventories, along with information on
EPA approval of these rules, and shows
that emissions reductions assumed by
the 2016 AQMP for future years for
stationary sources are supported by
rules approved as part of the SIP. With
respect to mobile sources, the EPA has
taken action in recent years to approve
CARB mobile source regulations into
the California SIP.41 We therefore find
that the future year baseline projections
in the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement are properly supported by
40 The 2012 base year inventory from the 2016
AQMP Inventory Supplement revises and updates
the base year emission inventory included in the
‘‘8-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Emission
Inventory Submittal’’ submitted by CARB on July
17, 2014. Because we understand the State intended
the 2016 AQMP and the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement to replace the July 2014 submittal (at
least with respect to Coachella Valley), we plan no
further action on the inventory for Coachella Valley
submitted by CARB in July 2014.
41 See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82 FR 14446
(March 21, 2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May 18, 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
SIP-approved stationary and mobile
source measures.42
B. Emissions Statement
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act
requires states to submit a SIP revision
requiring owners or operators of
stationary sources of VOC or NOX to
provide the state with statements of
actual emissions from such sources.
Statements must be submitted at least
every year and must contain a
certification that the information
contained in the statement is accurate to
the best knowledge of the individual
certifying the statement. Section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act allows states
to waive the emissions statement
requirement for any class or category of
stationary sources that emit less than 25
tpy of VOC or NOX, if the state provides
an inventory of emissions from such
class or category of sources as part of the
base year or periodic inventories
required under CAA sections 182(a)(1)
and 182(a)(3)(A), based on the use of
emissions factors established by the
EPA or other methods acceptable to the
EPA.
The preamble of the 2008 Ozone SRR
states that if an area has a previously
approved emissions statement rule for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS or the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS that covers all portions
of the nonattainment area for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, such rule should be
sufficient for purposes of the emissions
statement requirement for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. The state should review
the existing rule to ensure it is adequate
and, if so, may rely on it to meet the
emissions statement requirement for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.43 Where an
existing emissions statement
requirement is still adequate to meet the
requirements of this rule, states can
provide the rationale for that
42 The baseline emissions projections in the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP assume implementation of
CARB’s Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) sales
mandate and greenhouse gas (GHG) standards. On
September 27, 2019, the U.S. Department of
Transportation and the EPA issued a notice of final
rulemaking for the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
(SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National
Program that, among other things, withdrew the
EPA’s 2013 waiver of preemption of CARB’s ZEV
sales mandate and GHG standards. 84 FR 51310.
See also proposed SAFE rule at 83 FR 42986
(August 24, 2018). However, the agencies’ final rule
withdrawing the 2013 waiver did not include final
action on the federal fuel economy and GHG
vehicle emissions standards from the SAFE
proposal. If the fuel economy and GHG standards
are finalized prior to our final rulemaking on the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP, we will evaluate
and address, as appropriate, the impact of the SAFE
action on our proposed action.
43 See 80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2955
determination to the EPA in a written
statement in the SIP to meet this
requirement. States should identify the
various requirements and how each is
met by the existing emissions statement
program. Where an emissions statement
requirement is modified for any reason,
states must provide the revision to the
emissions statement as part of its SIP.
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
The 2016 AQMP addresses
compliance with the emissions
statement requirement in CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
by reference to District Rule 301 that,
among other things, requires emissions
reporting from all stationary sources of
NOX and VOC greater than or equal to
4 tpy. District Rule 301 applies
throughout both the South Coast and the
Coachella Valley. On July 12, 2019, the
District adopted revisions to District
Rule 301 to meet the requirements in
CAA section 182(a)(3)(B), and on July
19, 2019, the District submitted to CARB
a request for Rule 301 to be included
into the California SIP and forwarded to
the EPA. On August 5, 2019, CARB
adopted and submitted paragraphs
(e)(1)(A) and (B), (e)(2), (e)(5) and (e)(8)
of District Rule 301 to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP. The
submittal includes CARB Executive
Order S–19–011 adopting the specified
sections of District Rule 301 as a
revision to the SIP, a copy of District
Rule 301 itself, and documentation of
public notice and opportunity to
comment on the draft rule.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
On October 1, 2019, as part of our
approval of the 2016 South Coast Ozone
SIP, the EPA approved portions of
District Rule 301 (paragraphs (e)(1)(A)
and (B), (e)(2), (e)(5) and (e)(8)) as
meeting the emissions statement
requirement under CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the South Coast for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.44 Rule 301 is
effective throughout both the South
Coast and the Coachella Valley.
Therefore, the approved portions of
District Rule 301 also satisfy the CAA
182(a)(3)(B) requirements for the 2008
ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley.
C. Reasonably Available Control
Measures Demonstration and Control
Strategy
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that
each attainment plan provide for the
implementation of all RACM as
44 84
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
FR 52005, 52015.
17JAP1
2956
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
expeditiously as practicable (including
such reductions in emissions from
existing sources in the area as may be
obtained through implementation of
reasonably available control technology
(RACT)), and also provide for
attainment of the NAAQS. The 2008
Ozone SRR requires that, for each
nonattainment area required to submit
an attainment demonstration, the state
concurrently submit a SIP revision
demonstrating that it has adopted all
RACM necessary to demonstrate
attainment as expeditiously as
practicable and to meet any RFP
requirements.45
The EPA has previously provided
guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (‘‘General
Preamble’’) and in a memorandum
entitled ‘‘Guidance on the Reasonably
Available Control Measure Requirement
and Attainment Demonstration
Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas.’’ 46 In short, to address the
requirement to adopt all RACM, states
should consider all potentially
reasonable control measures for source
categories in the nonattainment area to
determine whether they are reasonably
available for implementation in that
area and whether they would, if
implemented individually or
collectively, advance the area’s
attainment date by one year or more.47
Any measures that are necessary to meet
these requirements that are not already
either federally promulgated, or part of
the state’s SIP, must be submitted in
enforceable form as part of the state’s
attainment plan for the area.48
45 40
CFR 51.1112(c).
General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13560
(April 16, 1992) and memorandum dated November
30, 1999, from John Seitz, Director, OAQPS, to
Regional Air Directors, titled ‘‘Guidance on the
Reasonably Available Control Measure Requirement
and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for
Ozone Nonattainment Areas.’’
47 Id. See also 44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979), and
memorandum dated December 14, 2000, from John
S. Seitz, Director, OAQPS, to Regional Air
Directors, titled ‘‘Additional Submission on RACM
From States with Severe One-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs.’’
48 For ozone nonattainment areas classified as
Moderate or above, CAA section 182(b)(2) also
requires implementation of RACT for all major
sources of VOC and for each VOC source category
for which the EPA has issued a control techniques
guideline. CAA section 182(f) requires that RACT
under section 182(b)(2) also apply to major
stationary sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major
source is a stationary source that emits or has the
potential to emit at least 25 tpy of VOC or NOX (see
CAA section 182(e) and (f)). Under the 2008 Ozone
SRR, states were required to submit SIP revisions
meeting the RACT requirements of CAA sections
182(b)(2) and 182(f) no later than 24 months after
the effective date of designation for the 2008 Ozone
NAAQS and to implement the required RACT
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
46 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
For the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP, the District, CARB, and SCAG each
undertook a process to identify and
evaluate potential RACM that could
contribute to expeditious attainment of
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley. The RACM demonstration for
the Coachella Valley is the same
demonstration undertaken for the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP that the EPA
approved on November 1, 2019.49
a. District’s RACM Analysis
The District’s RACM demonstration
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS focuses on
stationary and area source controls, and
it is described in Appendix VI–A
(‘‘Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM)/Best Available
Control Measures (BACM)
Demonstration’’) of the 2016 AQMP.
Appendix VI–A identifies potential
control measures and analyzes these
measures for emission reduction
opportunities, as well as economic and
technological feasibility. The District’s
comprehensive demonstration considers
potential control measures for stationary
and area sources located throughout the
areas under its jurisdiction, including
both the South Coast (where most of the
sources are located) and the Coachella
Valley. Therefore, the demonstration
includes not only all of the source
categories present in the Coachella
Valley, but also the source categories
found only in the South Coast.
As a first step in the RACM analysis,
the District prepared a detailed
inventory of emissions sources that emit
VOC and NOX to identify source
categories from which emissions
reductions would effectively contribute
to attainment. Details on the
methodology and development of the
emissions inventory are discussed in
Chapter 7 and Appendix III of the 2016
AQMP. A total of 76 source categories
are included in the base year emissions
inventory: 46 for stationary and area
sources and 30 for mobile sources.50
measures as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than January 1 of the 5th year after the
effective date of designation (see 40 CFR
51.1112(a)). California submitted the CAA section
182 RACT SIP for the South Coast and the
Coachella Valley on July 18, 2014, and the EPA
fully approved this submission at 82 FR 43850
(September 20, 2017).
49 84 FR 52005.
50 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI–A, Table VI–A–3.
The majority of the stationary emissions sources
included in this inventory are located in the South
Coast. The 2016 AQMP identifies only two
stationary sources (i.e., Desert View Power and
Imperial Irrigation District) emitting 10 tpy or more
of either VOC or NOX in 2012 located within the
Coachella Valley. See 2016 AQMP, Appendix III,
Attachment C. CARB’s Facility Search Engine
database shows three sources (i.e., Desert View
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
For the RACM analysis, the District
then compared these source categories
to its rules for stationary and area
sources. This analysis builds upon a
foundation of District rules developed
for earlier ozone plans and approved as
part of the SIP. We provide a list of the
District’s NOX and VOC rules approved
into the California SIP in Table 1 of our
TSD for this proposed action. The 86
SIP-approved District VOC or NOX rules
listed in Table 1 of our TSD establish
emissions limits or other types of
emissions controls for a wide range of
sources, including use of solvents,
refineries, gasoline storage, architectural
coatings, spray booths, various types of
commercial coatings, boilers, steam
generators and process heaters, oil and
gas production well, marine tank vessel
operations, and many more. These rules
have already provided significant
reductions toward attainment of the
2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026.
To demonstrate that the SCAQMD
considered all candidate measures that
are available and technologically and
economically feasible, the District
conducted a six-step analysis, as
described below.
Step 1. 2015 Air Quality Technology
Symposium (‘‘2015 Symposium’’)
The 2015 Symposium was held on
June 10 and 11, 2015, with participation
of technical experts and the public to
solicit new and innovative concepts to
assist in attaining the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS by the applicable
attainment dates. The SCAQMD also
conducted extensive outreach to engage
a wide range of stakeholders in the
process.
Step 2. Reasonably Available Control
Technology/Best Available Control
Technology Analysis
The District’s Reasonably Available
Control Technology/Best Available
Control Technology (RACT/BACT)
analysis 51 found four SCAQMD VOC or
NOX rules (i.e., District Rules 462
(‘‘Organic Liquid Loading’’), 1115
(‘‘Motor Vehicle Assembly Line Coating
Operations’’), 1118 (‘‘Control of
Emissions from Refinery Flares’’) and
1138 (‘‘Control of Emissions from
Power, Palm Springs International Airport, and
Sentinel Energy Center LLC) emitting 10 tpy or
more of either VOC or NOX emissions in 2017
located in the Coachella Valley. See the docket for
today’s action or go to CARB’s database at https://
www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php
and set Air Basin search filter to ‘‘Salton Sea.’’
51 BACM, including BACT, is a requirement for
certain PM2.5 nonattainment areas. BACM is not a
requirement for ozone nonattainment areas, but
because the District addresses both PM2.5 and ozone
in its 2016 AQMP, the District prepared an analysis
that addresses both RACT and BACT.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Restaurant Operations’’)) that are less
stringent than EPA control techniques
guidelines or analogous rules in other
air districts. The SCAQMD evaluated
the rules as candidate potential
measures. See section IV of the TSD for
this action for the EPA’s evaluation of
the four rules.
Step 3. EPA TSDs
The District researched TSDs from
recent EPA rulemakings on SCAQMD
rules for EPA recommendations on
potential control measures. The TSD for
the EPA’s action on District Rule 1125
(‘‘Metal Container, Closure, and Coil
Coating Operations,’’ amended March 7,
2008) was the only applicable and
recent TSD that met the criteria for
review.
Step 4. Control Measures in Other Areas
The District reviewed control
measures in other areas (i.e., Ventura
County, San Francisco Bay Area, San
Joaquin Valley, Sacramento
Metropolitan, Dallas-Fort Worth and
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, New York,
and New Jersey) to evaluate whether
control technologies available and costeffective within other areas would be
available and cost-effective for use in
the South Coast and the Coachella
Valley.
Step 5. Control Measures beyond RACM
in 2012 AQMP
The District updated the RACM
analysis for four control measures that
were determined to be beyond RACM in
the analysis for the prior 2012 AQMP,
including reconsideration of emissions
reductions of VOC from greenwaste
composting.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Step 6. EPA Menu of Control Measures
The Menu of Control Measures
(MCM) 52 compiled by the EPA’s Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards
was created to provide information
useful in the development of emissions
reduction strategies and to identify and
evaluate potential control measures.
District staff reviewed the MCM for
point and nonpoint sources of NOX and
VOC.
The District provides a
comprehensive evaluation of its RACM
control strategy in Appendix VI–A of
the 2016 AQMP. The evaluation
includes the following: Source
descriptions; base year and projected
baseline year emissions for the source
category affected by the rule; discussion
of the current requirements of the rule;
and discussion of potential additional
52 EPA,
MCM, https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/
pdfs/MenuOfControlMeasures.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
2957
control measures, including, in many
cases, a discussion of the technological
and economic feasibility of the
additional control measures. This
includes comparison of each District
rule to analogous control measures
adopted by other agencies.
Based on its RACM analysis for
stationary and area sources under its
jurisdiction, the District identified the
following three additional RACM with
quantifiable VOC and NOX emission
reductions: CMB–02—Emission
Reductions from Replacement with Zero
or Near-Zero NOX Appliances in
Commercial and Residential
Applications; CMB–03—Emission
Reductions from Non-Refinery Flares;
and BCM–10—Emission Reductions
from Greenwaste Composting. These
three RACM are included in the
District’s stationary source measures in
Table 4–2 of the 2016 AQMP that the
District Board adopted through
Resolution 17–2. For the few remaining
measures that the District rejected from
its RACM analysis, the District
determined that these measures would
not collectively advance the attainment
date or contribute to RFP due to the
uncertain or non-quantifiable emissions
reductions they would potentially
generate.53
Based on its evaluation of all available
measures, the District concluded that its
existing rules are generally as stringent
as, or more stringent than, the analogous
rules in other districts. Further, the
District concluded that, based on its
comprehensive review and evaluation of
potential candidate measures and the
adoption of commitments to implement
the three measures determined to be
technologically and economically
feasible, the District meets the RACM
requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
for all sources under the District’s
jurisdiction.
Lastly, the District concluded that its
controls will achieve attainment for the
ozone standards as expeditiously as
possible, and that the available control
measures not included as plan
commitments would not collectively
advance attainment.54
pollutant transport from the South Coast
Air Basin on ozone conditions in the
Coachella Valley, neither the District
nor CARB rely on implementation of
any TCMs in the Coachella Valley to
demonstrate implementation of RACM
in the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.
SCAG conducted the TCM RACM
analysis on behalf of the local
jurisdictions in its region, based on its
2016 RTP/SCS and 2015 Federal
Transportation Improvement Program
(FTIP), as amended.55 The 2016 RTP/
SCS and FTIP were developed in
consultation with federal, state and
local transportation and air quality
planning agencies and other
stakeholders. The four county
transportation commissions (CTCs),56
including the Riverside CTC overseeing
the Coachella Valley, were involved in
the development of the regional
transportation measures in Appendix
IV–C.57
As described in Appendix IV–C of the
2016 AQMP, for the TCM RACM
analysis, SCAG compared the list of
measures implemented within the
South Coast with those implemented in
other ozone and PM2.5 nonattainment
areas.58 SCAG then organized measures,
including candidate measures and those
measures currently implemented in the
region, according to the sixteen
categories specified in section
108(f)(1)(A) of the CAA. SCAG found a
small number of candidate measures
that were not currently implemented in
the region and not included in the prior
2012 AQMP TCM RACM analysis.
Attachment A (‘‘Committed
Transportation Control Measures
(TCMs)’’) to Appendix IV–C of the 2016
AQMP lists the TCM projects that are
specifically identified and committed to
in the 2016 AQMP. The complete listing
of all candidate measures evaluated for
the RACM determination is included in
Attachment B (‘‘2016 South Coast
AQMP Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) Analysis—TCMs’’) to
Appendix IV–C of the 2016 AQMP.
Based on its comprehensive review of
TCM projects in other nonattainment
b. Local Jurisdictions’ RACM Analysis
and Transportation Control Measures
Appendix IV–C of the 2016 AQMP,
contains the transportation control
measure (TCM) RACM component for
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. The
TCMs in Appendix IV–C are applicable
in the upwind South Coast Air Basin.
Because of the significant influence of
55 The 2016 RTP/SCS was adopted by SCAG’s
Regional Council on April 7, 2016. The 2015 FTIP
was adopted by SCAG’s Executive/Administration
Committee on September 11, 2014, and approved
by the Federal Highway Administration on
December 14, 2014.
56 Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, Riverside County
Transportation Commission, Orange County
Transportation Authority, and the San Bernardino
County Transportation Authority (formerly known
as the San Bernardino Associated Governments).
57 2016 AQMP, Appendix IV–C, page IV–C–1.
58 The specific nonattainment area SIPs that were
reviewed for candidate TCMs for ozone are listed
in Table 4 of Appendix IV–C of the 2016 AQMP.
53 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI–A, page VI–A–40,
and Attachments VI–A–1c, VI–A–1d, and VI–A–2.
54 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI–A–40.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2958
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
areas or otherwise identified, SCAG
determined that the TCMs being
implemented in the South Coast are
inclusive of all RACM.59
c. CARB’s RACM Analysis
CARB’s RACM analysis is contained
in Attachment VI–A–3 (‘‘California
Mobile Source Control Program Best
Available Control Measures/Reasonably
Available Control Measures
Assessment’’) (‘‘BACM/RACM
assessment’’) to Appendix VI–A of the
2016 AQMP.
CARB’s BACM/RACM assessment
provides a general description of
CARB’s existing mobile source
programs. A more detailed description
of CARB’s mobile source control
program, including a comprehensive
table listing on- and off-road mobile
source regulatory actions taken by
CARB since 1985, is contained in
Attachment VI–C–1 to Appendix VI–C
of the 2016 AQMP. The BACM/RACM
assessment and 2016 State Strategy
collectively contain CARB’s evaluation
of mobile source and other statewide
control measures that reduce emissions
of NOX and VOC in California,
including the Coachella Valley. The
2016 State Strategy also includes a
commitment to take action on new
measures and to achieve aggregate
emissions reductions in the South
Coast.60 Because the Coachella Valley’s
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS is
dependent on progress made in the
upwind South Coast, this commitment
will contribute to attainment in the
Coachella Valley. On October 1, 2019,
the EPA approved the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP, including CARB’s
commitment.61 For additional details on
CARB’s commitment, see section
III.D.2.b.ii of our notice for the proposed
action.62
Source categories for which CARB has
primary responsibility for reducing
emissions in California include most
new and existing on- and off-road
engines and vehicles, motor vehicle
fuels, and consumer products. CARB
developed its 2016 State Strategy
through a multi-step measure
development process, including
extensive public consultation, to
develop and evaluate potential
strategies for mobile source categories
under CARB’s regulatory authority that
could contribute to expeditious
attainment of the standard.63 Through
59 Appendix
IV–C, page IV–C–30.
State Strategy, Chapter 3 (‘‘Proposed SIP
Commitment’’),
61 84 FR 52005, 52015.
62 84 FR 28132, 28147.
63 Appendix VI–A, Attachment VI–A–3, page VI–
A–102.
60 2016
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
the process of developing the 2016 State
Strategy, CARB identified certain
defined measures as available to achieve
additional VOC and NOX emissions
reductions from sources under CARB
jurisdiction, including tighter
requirements for new light- and
medium-duty vehicles (referred to as the
‘‘Advanced Clean Cars 2’’ measure), a
low-NOX engine standard for vehicles
with new heavy-duty engines, tighter
emissions standards for small off-road
engines, and more stringent
requirements for consumer products,
among others.64 In adopting the 2016
State Strategy, CARB commits to
bringing the defined measures to the
CARB Board for action according to the
specific schedule included as part of the
strategy.65
Given the need for substantial
emissions reductions from mobile and
area sources to meet the NAAQS in
California nonattainment areas, CARB
established stringent control measures
for on-road and off-road mobile sources
and the fuels that power them.
California has unique authority under
CAA section 209 (subject to a waiver by
the EPA) to adopt and implement new
emission standards for many categories
of on-road vehicles and engines, and
new and in-use off-road vehicles and
engines.
CARB’s mobile source program
extends beyond regulations that are
subject to the waiver or authorization
process set forth in CAA section 209 to
include standards and other
requirements to control emissions from
in-use heavy-duty trucks and buses,
gasoline and diesel fuel specifications,
and many other types of mobile sources.
Generally, these regulations have been
submitted and approved as revisions to
the California SIP.66
In the BACM/RACM assessment,
CARB concludes that, in light of the
extensive public process culminating in
the 2016 State Strategy, with the current
mobile source program and proposed
measures included in the 2016 State
Strategy, there are no additional RACM
that would advance attainment of the
2008 ozone NAAQS in the South Coast.
As a result, CARB concludes that
64 2016 State Strategy, Chapter 4 (‘‘State SIP
Measures’’).
65 CARB Resolution 17–7 (dated March 23, 2017),
7.
66 See, e.g., the EPA’s approval of standards and
other requirements to control emissions from in-use
heavy-duty diesel-powered trucks, at 77 FR 20308
(April 4, 2012), revisions to the California on-road
reformulated gasoline and diesel fuel regulations at
75 FR 26653 (May 12, 2010), and revisions to the
California motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance program at 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010).
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
California’s mobile source programs
fully meet the RACM requirement.67
Appendix IV–B of the 2016 AQMP
describes CARB’s current consumer
products program and commitments in
the 2016 State Strategy to achieve
additional VOC reductions from
consumer products.68 As described in
this section, CARB’s current consumer
products program limits VOC emissions
from 129 consumer product categories,
including product categories such as
antiperspirants and deodorants and
aerosol coatings.69 The EPA has
approved many of these measures into
the California SIP as VOC emissions
controls for a wide array of consumer
products.70
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
As described above, the District
already implements many rules to
reduce VOC and NOX emissions from
stationary and area sources in the
Coachella Valley. For the 2016 AQMP,
the District evaluated a range of
potentially available measures and
committed to adopt certain additional
measures (i.e., CMB–02, CMB–03, and
BCM–10) found to be reasonably
available for implementation in the
South Coast and Coachella Valley
nonattainment areas. We find that the
process followed by the District in the
2016 AQMP to identify additional
RACM is generally consistent with the
EPA’s recommendations in the General
Preamble, that the District’s evaluation
of potential measures is appropriate,
and that the District has provided
reasoned justifications for rejection of
measures deemed not reasonably
available.
With respect to mobile sources,
CARB’s current program addresses the
full range of mobile sources in the South
Coast and Coachella Valley through
regulatory programs for both new and
in-use vehicles. Moreover, we find that
the process conducted by CARB to
prepare the 2016 State Strategy was
reasonably designed to identify
additional available measures within
CARB’s jurisdiction, and that CARB has
67 2016
AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI–A–106.
AQMP, Appendix IV–B, page IV–B–93.
CARB’s consumer product measures are found in
the California Code of Regulations, Title 17 (‘‘Public
Health’’), Division 3 (‘‘Air Resources’’), Chapter 1
(‘‘Air Resources Board’’), Subchapter 8.5
(‘‘Consumer Products’’).
69 2016 AQMP, Appendix IV–B, page IV–B–93.
70 The compilation of such measures that have
been approved into the California SIP, including
Federal Register citations, is available at: https://
www.epa.gov/sips-ca/epa-approved-regulationscalifornia-sip. EPA’s most recent approval of
amendments to California’s consumer products
regulations was in 2014. 79 FR 62346 (October 17,
2014).
68 2016
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
adopted those measures that are
reasonably available (e.g., the low-NOX
heavy-duty engine standard, among
others). With respect to TCMs, we find
that SCAG’s process for identifying
additional TCM RACM and conclusion
that the TCMs being implemented in the
South Coast (i.e., the TCMs listed in
Attachment A to Appendix IV–C of the
2016 AQMP) are inclusive of all TCM
RACM to be reasonably justified and
supported. For the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP, given the significant
influence of pollutant transport from the
South Coast Air Basin and the minimal
and diminishing emissions benefits
generally associated with TCMs, no
TCM or combination of TCMs
implemented in the Coachella Valley
would advance the attainment date in
the Coachella Valley. Therefore, no
TCMs are reasonably available for
implementation in the Coachella Valley
for the purposes of meeting the RACM
requirement.
Additionally, we find that CARB’s
consumer products program
comprehensively addresses emissions
from consumer products in the South
Coast and Coachella Valley. CARB
measures are more stringent than the
EPA’s consumer products regulation
promulgated in 1998,71 and generally
exceed the controls in place throughout
other areas of the country. The
additional commitments included in the
2016 State Strategy will further
strengthen this program by achieving
additional VOC reductions.
Based on our review of these RACM
analyses, the District’s and CARB’s
adopted rules, and the District’s
commitment to adopt three additional
reasonably available measures (i.e.,
CMB–02, CMB–03, and BCM–10), we
propose to find that there are currently
no additional RACM (including RACT)
that would advance attainment of the
2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley, and that the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP provides for the
implementation of all RACM as required
by CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1112(c). For additional background
on the EPA’s evaluation of the District’s
RACM analysis, see our June 17, 2019
notice of proposed rulemaking on the
2016 South Coast Ozone SIP.72
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Attainment Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
An attainment demonstration consists
of: (1) Technical analyses, such as base
71 63
FR 48819 (September 11, 1998).
FR 28132, 28140. See also the EPA’s
November 1, 2019 approval of the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP at 84 FR 52005.
year and future year modeling, to locate
and identify sources of emissions that
are contributing to violations of the
ozone NAAQS within the
nonattainment area (i.e., analyses
related to the emissions inventory for
the nonattainment area and the
emissions reductions necessary to attain
the standards); (2) a list of adopted
measures (including RACT controls)
with schedules for implementation and
other means and techniques necessary
and appropriate for demonstrating RFP
and attainment as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the outside
attainment date for the area’s
classification; (3) a RACM analysis; and
(4) contingency measures required
under sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of
the CAA that can be implemented
without further action by the state or the
EPA to cover emissions shortfalls in
RFP and failures to attain.73 This
subsection of today’s proposed rule
addresses the first two components of
the attainment demonstration—the
technical analyses and a list of adopted
measures. Section III.C (Reasonably
Available Control Measures
Demonstration and Control Strategy) of
this document addresses the RACM
component, and section III.G
(Contingency Measures) addresses the
contingency measures component of the
attainment demonstration in the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.
With respect to the technical analyses,
section 182(c)(2)(A) of the CAA requires
that a plan for an ozone nonattainment
area classified Serious or above include
a ‘‘demonstration that the plan . . . will
provide for attainment of the ozone
[NAAQS] by the applicable attainment
date. This attainment demonstration
must be based on photochemical grid
modeling or any other analytical
method determined . . . to be at least as
effective.’’ The attainment
demonstration predicts future ambient
concentrations for comparison to the
NAAQS, making use of available
information on measured
concentrations, meteorology, and
current and projected emissions
inventories of ozone precursors,
including the effect of control measures
in the plan.
Areas classified Severe for the 2008
ozone NAAQS must demonstrate
attainment as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 15 years
after the effective date of designation to
nonattainment. The Coachella Valley
was designated nonattainment for the
2008 ozone NAAQS effective July 20,
72 84
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
73 78 FR 34178, 34184 (June 6, 2013) (proposed
rule for implementing the 2008 ozone NAAQS).
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2959
2012,74 and accordingly the area must
demonstrate attainment of the standards
by July 20, 2027.75 An attainment
demonstration must show attainment of
the standards by the calendar year prior
to the attainment date, so in practice,
Severe nonattainment areas must
demonstrate attainment in 2026.
The EPA’s recommended procedures
for modeling ozone as part of an
attainment demonstration are contained
in ‘‘Modeling Guidance for
Demonstrating Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze’’
(‘‘Modeling Guidance’’).76 The
Modeling Guidance includes
recommendations for a modeling
protocol, model input preparation,
model performance evaluation, use of
model output for the numerical NAAQS
attainment test, and modeling
documentation. Air quality modeling is
performed using meteorology and
emissions from a base year, and the
predicted concentrations from this base
case modeling are compared to air
quality monitoring data from that year
to evaluate model performance.
Once the model performance is
determined to be acceptable, future year
emissions are simulated with the model.
The relative (or percent) change in
modeled concentration due to future
emissions reductions provides a relative
response factor (RRF). Each monitoring
site’s RRF is applied to its monitored
base year design value to provide the
future design value for comparison to
the NAAQS. The Modeling Guidance
also recommends supplemental air
quality analyses, which may be used as
part of a weight of evidence (WOE)
analysis. A WOE analysis corroborates
the attainment demonstration by
considering evidence other than the
main air quality modeling attainment
test, such as trends and additional
monitoring and modeling analyses.
The Modeling Guidance also does not
require a particular year to be used as
the base year for 8-hour ozone plans.77
The Modeling Guidance states that the
most recent year of the National
Emissions Inventory may be appropriate
74 77
FR 30087 (May 21, 2012).
FR 12264.
76 Modeling Guidance, EPA 454/R–18–009,
November 2018. See https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/
scram/guidance/guide/O3-PM-RH-Modeling_
Guidance-2018.pdf. The Modeling Guidance
updates, but is largely consistent with, the earlier
‘‘Guidance on the Use of Models and Other
Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air
Quality Goals for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS and Regional Haze,’’ EPA–454/B–07–002,
April 2007. Additional EPA modeling guidance can
be found in 40 CFR 51 Appendix W, ‘‘Guideline on
Air Quality Models,’’ 82 FR 5182 (January 17,
2017); available at https://www.epa.gov/scram/
clean-air-act-permit-modeling-guidance.
77 Modeling Guidance at section 2.7.1, 35.
75 80
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2960
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
for use as the base year for modeling,
but that other years may be more
appropriate when considering
meteorology, transport patterns,
exceptional events, or other factors that
may vary from year to year.78 Therefore,
the base year used for the attainment
demonstration need not be the same
year used to meet the requirements for
emissions inventories and RFP.
With respect to the list of adopted
measures, CAA section 172(c)(6)
requires that nonattainment area plans
include enforceable emissions
limitations, and such other control
measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as
fees, marketable permits, and auctions
of emission rights), as well as schedules
and timetables for compliance, as may
be necessary or appropriate to provide
for timely attainment of the NAAQS.79
Under the 2008 Ozone SRR, all control
measures needed for attainment must be
implemented no later than the
beginning of the attainment year ozone
season.80 The attainment year ozone
season is defined as the ozone season
immediately preceding a nonattainment
area’s maximum attainment date.81
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
The 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
includes photochemical modeling for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The SCAQMD
performed the air quality modeling for
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.
The modeling relies on a 2012 base year
and demonstrates attainment of the
2008 ozone NAAQS in 2026.
As a general matter, the modeling for
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
represents an update to the
photochemical modeling performed for
the EPA-approved 2012 AQMP to
account for more recent satellite-based
input data, improved chemical gaseous
and particulate mechanisms, improved
computational resources and postprocessing utilities, enhanced spatial
and temporal allocations of the
emissions inventory, and a revised
attainment demonstration methodology.
The modeling and modeled attainment
demonstration are described in Chapter
5 (‘‘Future Air Quality’’) of the 2016
AQMP. Chapter 7 (‘‘Current and Future
Air Quality: Desert Nonattainment
Areas SIP’’) provides background
information on the Coachella Valley, as
well as the ozone attainment
demonstration. Appendix V (‘‘Modeling
and Attainment Demonstration’’) of the
78 Id.
79 See
also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
CFR 51.1108(d).
81 40 CFR 51.1100(h).
80 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
2016 AQMP provides a description of
model input preparation procedures,
various model configuration options,
and model performance statistics. The
modeling protocol is in Chapter 2
(‘‘Modeling Protocol’’) of Appendix V of
the 2016 AQMP and contains all the
elements recommended in the Modeling
Guidance. Those include: Selection of
model, time period to model, modeling
domain, and model boundary
conditions and initialization
procedures; a discussion of emissions
inventory development and other model
input preparation procedures; model
performance evaluation procedures;
selection of days; and other details for
calculating RRFs. Appendix V of the
2016 AQMP provides the coordinates of
the modeling domain and thoroughly
describes the development of the
modeling emissions inventory,
including its chemical speciation, its
spatial and temporal allocation, its
temperature dependence, and quality
assurance procedures. Appendix C of
CARB’s Staff Report for the 2016 AQMP,
entitled ‘‘Coachella Valley Weight of
Evidence,’’ provides additional
information about ozone formation and
trends in the Coachella Valley.
The modeling analysis used version
5.0.2 of the Community Multiscale Air
Quality (CMAQ) photochemical model,
developed by the EPA. To prepare
meteorological input for CMAQ, the
Weather and Research Forecasting
model version 3.6 (WRF) from the
National Center for Atmospheric
Research was used. CMAQ and WRF are
both recognized in the Modeling
Guidance as technically sound, state-ofthe-art models. The areal extent and the
horizontal and vertical resolution used
in these models were adequate for
modeling Coachella Valley ozone.
The WRF meteorological model
results and performance statistics are
described in Chapter 3 (‘‘Meteorological
Modeling and Sensitivity Analyses’’) of
Appendix V. The District evaluated the
performance of the WRF model through
a series of simulations and concluded
that the daily WRF simulation for 2012
provided representative meteorological
fields that well characterized the
observed conditions. The District’s
conclusions were supported by hourly
time series graphs of wind speed,
direction, and temperature for the
southern California domain, included as
Attachment 1 (‘‘WRF Model
Performance Time Series’’) to
Appendix V.
Ozone model performance statistics
are described in the 2016 AQMP
Appendix V, Chapter 5 (‘‘8-Hour Ozone
Attainment Demonstration’’) which
include tables of statistics
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recommended in the Modeling
Guidance for ozone for the South Coast
sub-regions, including the Coachella
Valley.82 Hourly time series are
presented as well as density scatter
plots, and plots of bias against
concentration. Note that, because only
relative changes are used from the
modeling, the underprediction of ozone
concentrations does not mean that
future concentrations will be
underestimated.
After model performance for the 2012
base case was accepted, the model was
applied to develop RRFs for the
attainment demonstration. This entailed
running the model with the same
meteorological inputs as before, but
with adjusted emissions inventories to
reflect the expected changes between
2012 and the 2026 attainment year. The
base year or ‘‘reference year’’ modeling
inventory was the same as the inventory
for the modeling base case. The 2026
inventory projects the base year into the
future by including the effect of
economic growth and emissions control
measures. The set of 153 days from May
1 through September 30, 2012, was
simulated and analyzed to determine 8hour average maximum ozone
concentrations for the 2012 and 2026
emissions inventories. To develop the
RRFs for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, only
the top 10 days were used, consistent
with the Modeling Guidance.83
The Modeling Guidance addresses
attainment demonstrations with ozone
NAAQS based on 8-hour averages, and
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2016
AQMP carried out the attainment test
procedure consistent with the Modeling
Guidance. The RRFs were calculated as
the ratio of future to base year
concentrations. The resulting RRFs were
then applied to 2012 weighted base year
design values 84 for each monitor to
arrive at 2026 future year design values.
Ozone is measured continuously at two
locations in the Coachella Valley at the
Palm Springs and Indio air monitoring
stations. The modeled 2026 ozone
design value at the Palm Springs site
(the higher of the two sites) is 0.075
ppm; this value demonstrates
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.85
82 The other sub-regions are the ‘‘Coastal,’’ ‘‘San
Fernando,’’ ‘‘Foothills,’’ ‘‘Urban Source,’’ and
‘‘Urban Receptor’’ zones.
83 See Modeling Guidance at section 4.2.1.
84 The Modeling Guidance recommends that
RRFs be applied to the average of three three-year
design values centered on the base year, in this case
the design values for 2010–2012, 2011–2013, and
2012–2014. This amounts to a 5-year weighted
average of individual year 4th high concentrations,
centered on the base year of 2012, and so is referred
to as a weighted design value.
85 2016 AQMP, Appendix V, page V–5–28.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2961
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
The 2016 AQMP modeling includes a
WOE demonstration, based on a model
performance evaluation of the temporal
profile of on-road mobile source
emissions and spatial surrogate profiles
of area emissions.86 The demonstration
is based on a sensitivity analysis of four
scenarios of emissions reductions.
Appendix C of CARB’s Staff Report for
the 2016 AQMP also provides a WOE
discussion that includes information
about ozone formation in the Coachella
Valley. The WOE demonstration in
Appendix C includes ambient ozone
data and trends, precursor emissions
trends and reductions, and population
exposure trends to complement the
regional photochemical modeling
analyses.
b. Control Strategy for the 2008 Ozone
NAAQS
The control strategy for attainment of
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley relies primarily on timely
attainment in 2023 of the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in the South Coast. Continued
air quality improvement in the
Coachella Valley is expected during the
2023 through 2026 timeframe because of
ongoing fleet turnover in the Coachella
Valley and South Coast and from
existing measures and additional
reductions from new measures
implemented before 2027 for attainment
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 2031 in
the South Coast.
The control strategy in the 2016 South
Coast Ozone SIP for attainment of the
1997 ozone NAAQS by 2023 in the
South Coast relies on emissions
reductions from already-adopted
measures, commitments by the District
to certain regulatory and nonregulatory
initiatives and aggregate emissions
reductions, and commitments by CARB
to certain regulatory and nonregulatory
initiatives and aggregate emissions
reductions. Already-adopted measures
are expected to achieve approximately
66 percent of the NOX reductions
needed from the 2012 base year for the
South Coast to attain the NAAQS in
2023. To address the remaining
emissions reductions, the 2016 South
Coast Ozone SIP includes District and
CARB aggregate commitments to
achieve additional emissions reductions
by 2023, as shown in tables 2, 3, and 4
below. Table 2 summarizes the
additional reduction commitments in
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. Tables
3 and 4 show the District and CARB
measures included in the aggregate
commitments in Table 2. The emissions
reductions for individual measures
shown in tables 3 and 4 are not
intended to be enforceable; they are
estimates prepared by the District and
CARB to show how they expect at the
present time to achieve the aggregate
emissions reductions for 2023. The
EPA’s June 17, 2019 proposed approval
of the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP
provides an extensive discussion of the
control strategy and attainment
demonstrations for the upwind South
Coast to attain the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS.87
TABLE 2—DISTRICT AND CARB AGGREGATE EMISSION REDUCTION COMMITMENTS FOR 2023 IN 2016 SOUTH COAST
OZONE PLAN
[Summer planning inventory, tpd] a
Year 2023
Plan
VOC
NOX
SCAQMD b ...............................................................................................................................................................
CARB c .....................................................................................................................................................................
23
113
6
50–51
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
136
56–57
NOX Emission
Reductions
(tpd)
VOC emission
reductions
(tpd)
a Rounded
to whole number.
AQMP, tables 4–9, 4–10 and 4–11. Reductions are from the 2012 base year.
c 2016 State Strategy, Table 4, and CARB Resolution 17–7 (March 23, 2017). Reductions are from the 2012 base year.
b 2016
TABLE 3—DISTRICT MEASURES WITH REDUCTIONS BY 2023 IN 2016 AQMP
No.
Title
CMB–01 ..............
Transition to Zero and Near-Zero Emission Technologies for Stationary Sources.
Emission Reductions from Replacement with Zero or
Near-Zero NOX Appliances in Commercial and Residential Applications
Emission Reductions from Non-Refinery Flares ...........
Emission Reductions from Restaurant Burners and
Residential Cooking.
Emission Reductions from Greenwaste Composting ....
Improved Leak Detection and Repair ...........................
Further Emission Reductions from Coatings, Solvents,
Adhesives, and Sealants.
Co-Benefits from Existing Residential and Commercial
Building Energy Efficiency Measures
Additional Enhancements in Reducing Existing Residential Building Energy Use.
Implementation period
2018
Ongoing .........
2.5
a 1.2
2018
2020–2031 .....
1.1
........................
2018
2018
2020 ...............
2022 ...............
1.4
0.8
a 0.4
........................
2019
2019
2017/2021
2020 ...............
2022 ...............
2020–2031 .....
........................
........................
........................
1.5
2.0
1.0
2018
Ongoing .........
0.3
a 0.1
2018
Ongoing .........
1.2
a 0.2
Stationary Sources Totals ................................................................................................................................
7.3
6.4
CMB–02 ..............
CMB–03 ..............
CMB–04 ..............
BCM–10 ..............
FUG–01 ...............
CTS–01 ...............
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Adoption
ECC–02 ...............
ECC–03 ...............
86 2016 AQMP, Appendix V, pages V–5–36 to V–
5–41.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
87 84
PO 00000
FR 28132.
Frm 00073
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2962
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—DISTRICT MEASURES WITH REDUCTIONS BY 2023 IN 2016 AQMP—Continued
No.
Title
MOB–10 ..............
Extension of the SOON b Provision for Construction/Industrial Equipment.
Extended Exchange Program .......................................
Emission Reductions from Incentive Programs ............
Implementation period
Adoption
NOX Emission
Reductions
(tpd)
VOC emission
reductions
(tpd)
NA
Ongoing .........
1.9
........................
NA
NA
Ongoing .........
2016–2024 .....
2.9
11
........................
........................
Mobile Sources Totals ......................................................................................................................................
Stationary and Mobile Sources Totals ......................................................................................................
15.8
23.1
........................
6.4
MOB–11 ..............
MOB–14 ..............
Notes:
a Corresponding VOC reductions from other measures.
b Surplus Off-Road Opt-In for NO Program
X
The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2016 AQMP, tables 4–2, 4–4, 4–9, 4–10 and 4–11.
TABLE 4—MEASURES WITH REDUCTIONS BY 2023 IN CARB’S 2016 STATE STRATEGY
Implementation
Title
Adoption
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Time frame
On-Road Light-Duty:
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
On-Road Heavy-Duty:
Lower In-Use Emission Performance Level ..
Innovative Clean Transit ...............................
Last Mile Delivery ..........................................
Incentive Funding to Achieve Further Emission Reductions from On-Road Heavy
Duty Vehicles b.
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
Aircraft:
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
Locomotives:
More Stringent National Locomotive Emission Standards.
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
Ocean-Going Vessels:
At-Berth Regulation Amendments .................
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
Off-Road Equipment:
Zero-Emission Airport Ground Support
Equipment.
Small Off-Road Engines ................................
Low-Emission Diesel Requirement ...............
Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies a.
Consumer Products:
Consumer Products Program ........................
Total Emission Reductions ....................
Agency
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
NOX Emission
Reductions
(tpd)
VOC emission
reductions
(tpd)
7
16
NYQ
<0.1
<0.1
3
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.4
ongoing ..........
2016
2017–2020 .....
2017 ...............
2018 ...............
ongoing ..........
2018 +
2018
2020
2016
ongoing ..........
2016
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
34
4
ongoing ..........
2016
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
9
NYQ
2017 ...............
2023
EPA ..............................
<0.1
<0.1
ongoing ..........
2016
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
7
0.3
2017–2018 .....
ongoing ..........
2023
2016
CARB ............................
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
0.3
30
<0.1
NYQ
2018 ...............
2023
CARB ............................
<0.1
<0.1
2018–2020 .....
by 2020 ..........
ongoing ..........
2022
2023
2016
CARB ............................
CARB ............................
CARB, SCAQMD, EPA
0.7
0.3
21
7
NYQ
21
2019–2021 .....
2020 +
CARB ............................
0
1–2
........................
........................
.......................................
113
50–51
CARB ............................
CARB ............................
CARB ............................
CARB, SCAQMD ..........
Notes:
a CARB requested the EPA approve the ‘‘Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies’’ measures under the provisions of section 182(e)(5) of
the CAA. In today’s action we also refer to these as new technology measures.
b On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted the ‘‘South Coast On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Incentive Measure.’’ On April 25, 2019, the EPA proposed to approve the measure as achieving 1 tpd of NOX reductions in 2023. See 84 FR 17365.
NYQ means not yet quantified.
The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2016 State Strategy, Table 4; Attachment A to CARB Resolution 17–7 (March 23, 2017).
c. Attainment Demonstration
Chapter 7 of the 2016 AQMP includes
a section entitled ‘‘Ozone Attainment
Demonstration and Projections,’’ which
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
describes the Coachella Valley’s
progress toward attaining the 1997,
2008, and 2015 ozone standards.88 For
88 2016
PO 00000
AQMP, 7–35 to 7–40.
Frm 00074
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2016
AQMP summarizes the District’s
modeling for the area, and concludes
that the measures included in the
control strategy (including CARB
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
commitments) will result in the area
attaining the standards no later than
2026. The WOE discussion in Appendix
C of CARB’s Staff Report for the 2016
AQMP provides additional discussion
of air quality trends and projections in
the Coachella Valley and determines
that the area is on track to attain the
2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
a. Photochemical Modeling
As discussed above in Section III.A of
this notice, we are proposing to approve
the base year emissions inventory and to
find that the future year emissions
projections in the 2016 AQMP reflect
appropriate calculation methods and
that the latest planning assumptions are
properly supported by SIP-approved
stationary and mobile source measures.
In the discussion below, we address our
findings for the modeling submitted
with the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP. Because of the importance of ozone
transport from the South Coast to
attainment in the Coachella Valley, and
the close interactions of the modeling
for each area, we have considered the
modeling for both areas. Similar and
additional discussion for the South
Coast can be found in our June 17, 2019
proposed action on the 2016 South
Coast Ozone SIP.89
Based on our review of Appendix V
of the 2016 AQMP, the EPA finds that
the photochemical modeling is adequate
for purposes of supporting the
attainment demonstration.90 First, we
note the extensive discussion of
modeling procedures, tests, and
performance analyses called for in the
Modeling Protocol (i.e., Chapter 2 of
Appendix V of the 2016 AQMP) and the
good model performance. Second, we
find the WRF meteorological model
results and performance statistics,
including hourly time series graphs of
wind speed, direction, and temperature
for both the South Coast and the
Coachella Valley, to be satisfactory and
consistent with our Modeling
Guidance.91 Performance was evaluated
for each month in each zone for the
entire year of 2012.92 Diurnal variation
of temperature, humidity and surface
wind are well represented by WRF.
Geographically, winds are predicted
most accurately at the inland urban
89 84
FR 28132.
EPA’s review of the modeling and
attainment demonstration is discussed in greater
detail in section VI of the TSD (‘‘Modeling and
Attainment Demonstration’’).
91 Modeling Guidance, 30.
92 Temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, and
wind speed were evaluated in terms of normalized
gross bias and normalized gross error.
90 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
receptor sites. Accurate wind
predictions in this region of elevated
ozone concentrations is one of the most
critical factors to simulate chemical
transport to the Coachella Valley.
Overall, the daily WRF simulation for
2012 provided representative
meteorological fields that characterized
the observed conditions well.
The model performance statistics for
ozone are described in Chapter 5 of
Appendix V and are based on the
statistical evaluation recommended in
the Modeling Guidance. Model
performance was provided for 8-hour
daily maximum ozone for Coachella
Valley as well as other areas in the
Southern California modeling domain.93
A geographical bias is shown in the time
series, with over-prediction in coastal
areas, and under-prediction in the
inland areas, including Coachella
Valley.94 The 2016 AQMP also presents
ozone frequency distributions, scatter
plots, and plots of bias against
concentration. The scatter and density
scatter plots show low bias at high
concentrations, and higher bias at low
concentrations. The low bias at high
concentrations is important because it
reflects the model’s capability to predict
high concentrations, in particular, the
top 10 days that form the basis for the
RRF calculation. The supplemental
hourly time series show generally good
performance, though many individual
daily ozone peaks are underpredicted.
As noted above, however, the
underprediction of absolute ozone
concentrations does not mean that
future concentrations will be
underestimated. In addition, the WOE
analysis presented in Appendix C of
CARB’s Staff Report for the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP provides
additional information with respect to
the sensitivity to emissions changes and
further supports the model performance.
We are proposing to find the air quality
modeling adequate to support the
attainment demonstration for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, based on reasonable
meteorological and ozone modeling
performance, and supported by the
93 2016 AQMP Appendix V, Table V–5–8. These
zones are represented by the following ozone
monitoring sites: ‘‘Coastal’’ (Costa Mesa, LAX, Long
Beach, Mission Viejo, West Los Angeles); ‘‘Urban
Source’’ (Anaheim, Central Los Angeles, Compton,
La Habra, Pico Rivera, Pomona); ‘‘San Fernando’’
(Reseda, Santa Clarita, Burbank); ‘‘Foothills’’
(Azusa, Glendora, Pasadena); ‘‘Urban Receptor’’
(Crestline, Fontana, Lake Elsinore, Mira Loma,
Redlands, Rubidoux, San Bernardino, Upland); and
‘‘Coachella Valley’’ (Palm Springs and Indio).
94 The model performance varied by zone, with
over-prediction in the ‘‘Coastal’’ zone and underprediction in the ‘‘San Fernando,’’ and ‘‘Foothills’’
zones. The model ozone predictions in the ‘‘Urban
Receptor’’ zone agree reasonably well with the
measurements.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2963
weight of evidence analyses. For
additional information, please see
section VI of the TSD for this action.
b. Control Strategy
The Coachella Valley control strategy
relies primarily on previously adopted
and future emissions reductions
detailed in the 2016 South Coast Ozone
SIP. As described in Section III.D.2.b
above, a significant portion of the
emissions reductions needed to attain
the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the South
Coast by 2023 will be obtained through
previously adopted measures in the SIP,
and the balance of the reductions
needed for attainment will result from
enforceable commitments to take certain
specific actions within prescribed
periods and to achieve aggregate
tonnage reductions of VOC or NOX by
specific years. The aggregate
commitments provide the remaining
additional upwind reductions necessary
for the Coachella Valley to attain the
2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026. In our
October 1, 2019 approval of the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP, the EPA
approved the control strategy, including
CARB’s and the District’s aggregate
commitments, for the South Coast to
attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS.95 For the
reasons described in that action, and
based on the District’s demonstration
specific to the Coachella Valley
described above, we propose to find the
District’s control strategy acceptable for
purposes of attaining the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley. For
additional information, please see the
TSD for this action.
c. Attainment Demonstration
Based on our proposed
determinations that the photochemical
modeling and control strategy are
acceptable, we propose to approve the
attainment demonstration for the 2008
ozone NAAQS in the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1108.
E. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable
Further Progress Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
Requirements for RFP for ozone
nonattainment areas are specified in
CAA sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1), and
182(c)(2)(B). Under CAA section 171(1),
RFP is defined as meaning such annual
incremental reductions in emissions of
the relevant air pollutant as are required
under part D (‘‘Plan Requirements for
Nonattainment Areas’’) of the CAA or as
may reasonably be required by the EPA
95 See
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
84 FR 52005.
17JAP1
2964
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
for the purpose of ensuring attainment
of the applicable NAAQS by the
applicable date. CAA section 182(b)(1)
specifically requires that ozone
nonattainment areas classified as
Moderate or above demonstrate a 15
percent reduction in VOC between the
years of 1990 and 1996. The EPA has
typically referred to section 182(b)(1) as
the rate of progress (ROP) requirement.
For ozone nonattainment areas
classified as Serious or higher, section
182(c)(2)(B) requires VOC reductions of
at least 3 percent of baseline emissions
per year, averaged over each
consecutive 3-year period, beginning 6
years after the baseline year until the
attainment date. Under CAA section
182(c)(2)(C), a state may substitute NOX
emissions reductions for VOC emissions
reductions. Additionally, CAA section
182(c)(2)(B)(ii) allows an amount less
than 3 percent of such baseline
emissions each year if a state
demonstrates to the EPA that its plan
includes all measures that can feasibly
be implemented in the area in light of
technological achievability.
In the 2008 Ozone SRR, the EPA
provides that areas classified Moderate
or higher will have met the ROP
requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) if
the area has a fully approved 15 percent
ROP plan for the 1-hour or 1997 ozone
NAAQS.96 For such areas, the EPA
interprets the RFP requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(2) to require areas
classified as Moderate to provide a 15
percent emissions reduction of ozone
precursors within 6 years of the baseline
year. Areas classified as Serious or
higher must meet the RFP requirements
of CAA section 182(c)(2)(B) by
providing an 18 percent reduction of
ozone precursors in the first 6-year
period, and an average ozone precursor
emissions reduction of 3 percent per
year for all remaining 3-year periods
thereafter.97 The 2008 Ozone SRR
allows substitution of NOX reductions
for VOC reductions to meet the CAA
section 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) RFP
requirements.98
Except as specifically provided in
CAA section 182(b)(1)(C), emissions
reductions from all SIP-approved,
federally promulgated, or otherwise SIPcreditable measures that occur after the
baseline year are creditable for purposes
of demonstrating that the RFP targets are
met. Because the EPA has determined
that the passage of time has caused the
effect of certain exclusions to be de
minimis, the RFP demonstration is no
longer required to calculate and
specifically exclude reductions from
measures related to motor vehicle
exhaust or evaporative emissions
promulgated by January 1, 1990;
regulations concerning Reid vapor
pressure promulgated by November 15,
1990; measures to correct previous
RACT requirements; and measures
required to correct previous inspection
and maintenance (I/M) programs.99
The 2008 Ozone SRR requires the RFP
baseline year to be the most recent
calendar year for which a complete
triennial inventory was required to be
submitted to the EPA. For the purposes
of developing RFP demonstrations for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the applicable
triennial inventory year is 2011. As
discussed previously, the 2008 Ozone
SRR provided states with the
opportunity to use an alternative
baseline year for RFP,100 but that
provision of the 2008 Ozone SRR was
vacated by the D.C. Circuit in the South
Coast II decision.
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
In response to the South Coast II
decision, CARB developed the 2018 SIP
Update to revise the RFP
demonstrations in previously submitted
ozone SIPs, including the Coachella
Valley RFP demonstration in the 2016
AQMP. The 2018 SIP Update includes
updated emissions estimates for the
2011 RFP baseline year, subsequent
milestone years, and the attainment
year.101 To develop the 2011 RFP
baseline inventory, CARB relied on
actual emissions reported from
industrial point sources for year 2011
and backcast emissions from smaller
stationary sources and area sources from
2012 to 2011 using the same growth and
control factors as was used for the 2016
AQMP. To develop the emissions
inventories for the RFP milestone years
(i.e., 2017, 2020, 2023) and attainment
year (2026), CARB also relied upon the
same growth and control factors as the
2016 AQMP.102 For both sets of baseline
emissions inventories (those in the 2016
AQMP and those in the 2018 SIP
Update), emissions estimates reflect
District rules adopted through December
2015 and CARB rules adopted through
November 2015.
The updated RFP demonstration for
Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS is shown in Table 5. The
updated RFP demonstration calculates
future year VOC targets from the 2011
baseline, consistent with CAA
182(c)(2)(B)(i), which requires
reductions of ‘‘at least 3 percent of
baseline emissions each year,’’ and it
substitutes NOX reductions for VOC
reductions beginning in milestone year
2020 to meet VOC emission targets.103
For the Coachella Valley, CARB
concludes that the RFP demonstration
meets the applicable requirements for
each milestone year as well as the
attainment year.
TABLE 5—RFP DEMONSTRATION FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY FOR THE 2008 OZONE NAAQS
[Summer planning inventory, tpd or percent]
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VOC
Baseline VOC .....................................................................
Required change since 2011 (VOC or NOX), % ................
Required reductions since 2011 .........................................
Target VOC level ................................................................
Apparent shortfall in VOC ...................................................
Apparent shortfall in VOC, % .............................................
VOC shortfall previously provided by NOX substitution, %
Actual VOC shortfall, % ......................................................
96 70
FR 12264, 12271 (March 6, 2015).
97 Id.
2017
2020
2023
16.9
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
14.8 ................
18% ................
3.0 ..................
13.9 ................
¥0.9 ..............
¥5.6% ...........
0.0% ...............
¥5.6% ...........
14.5 ................
27% ................
4.6 ..................
12.3 ................
¥2.2 ..............
¥13.0% .........
5.6% ...............
¥7.5% ...........
14.7 ................
36% ................
6.1 ..................
10.8 ................
¥3.9 ..............
¥23.0% .........
13.0% .............
¥10.0% .........
100 40
CFR 51.1110(b).
SIP Update, RFP demonstration, section
IX–B, 44 and 45.
102 Documentation for the Coachella Valley RFP
baseline and milestone emissions inventories is
101 2018
98 Id.; 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B).
99 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(7).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2011
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2026
15.1
45%
7.6
9.3
¥5.8
¥34.1%
23.0%
¥11.1%
found in the 2018 SIP Update on pages 4–5, 44–45,
and Appendix A, pages A–23 to A–26.
103 NO substitution is permitted under EPA
X
regulations. See 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40
CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B); and 70 FR 12264, at 12271
(March 6, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2965
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—RFP DEMONSTRATION FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY FOR THE 2008 OZONE NAAQS—Continued
[Summer planning inventory, tpd or percent]
VOC
2011
2017
2020
2023
2026
NOX
Baseline NOX ......................................................................
Change in NOX since 2011 ................................................
Change in NOX since 2011, % ...........................................
NOX reductions used for VOC substitution through last
milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 available for VOC substitution
in this milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 used for VOC substitution in
this milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 surplus after meeting VOC
substitution needs in this milestone year, %.
Total shortfall for RFP ........................................................
RFP met? ............................................................................
29.8
........................
........................
........................
18.1 ................
11.8 ................
39.4% .............
0% ..................
14.9 ................
15.0 ................
50.2% .............
5.6% ...............
10.2 ................
19.6 ................
65.8% .............
13.0% .............
9.1
20.7
69.4%
23.0%
........................
39.4% .............
44.6% .............
52.8% .............
46.4%
........................
5.6% ...............
7.5% ...............
10.0% .............
11.1%
........................
33.9% .............
37.2% .............
42.9% .............
35.3%
........................
........................
0% ..................
Yes .................
0% ..................
Yes .................
0% ..................
Yes .................
0%
Yes
Source: Table VII–2 of the 2018 SIP Update.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
In 2017, the EPA approved a 15
percent ROP plan for the Coachella
Valley.104 As a result, the District and
CARB have met the ROP requirements
of CAA section 182(b)(1) for the
Coachella Valley and do not need to
demonstrate another 15 percent
reduction in VOC for this area.
Based on our review of the emissions
inventory documentation in the 2016
AQMP and 2018 SIP Update, we find
that CARB and the District have used
the most recent planning and activity
assumptions, emissions models, and
methodologies in developing the RFP
baseline and milestone year emissions
inventories. We have also reviewed the
calculations in Table VII–2 of the 2018
SIP Update (presented in Table 2 above)
and find that the District and CARB
have used an appropriate calculation
method to demonstrate RFP. For these
reasons, we have determined that the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
demonstrates RFP, in each milestone
year and the attainment year, consistent
with applicable CAA requirements and
EPA guidance. We therefore propose to
approve the RFP demonstrations for the
Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS under sections 172(c)(2),
182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B) of the CAA
and 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(ii).
104 82
FR 26854 (June 12, 2017).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
F. Transportation Control Strategies and
Measures to Offset Emissions Increases
From Vehicle Miles Traveled
1. Stationary and Regulatory
Requirements
Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act
requires, in relevant part, a state to
submit, for each area classified as
Serious or above, a SIP revision that
‘‘identifies and adopts specific
enforceable transportation control
strategies and transportation control
measures to offset any growth in
emissions from growth in vehicle miles
traveled or number of vehicle trips in
such area.’’ 105 Herein, we use ‘‘VMT’’ to
refer to vehicle miles traveled and refer
to the related SIP requirement as the
‘‘VMT emissions offset requirement.’’ In
addition, we refer to the SIP revision
intended to demonstrate compliance
with the VMT emissions offset
requirement as the ‘‘VMT emissions
offset demonstration.’’
In Association of Irritated Residents v.
EPA, the Ninth Circuit ruled that
105 CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) includes three
separate elements. In short, under section
182(d)(1)(A), states are required to adopt
transportation control strategies and measures to
offset growth in emissions from growth in VMT,
and, as necessary, in combination with other
emission reduction requirements, to demonstrate
RFP and attainment. For more information on the
EPA’s interpretation of the three elements of section
182(d)(1)(A). See 77 FR 58067 58068 (September 19,
2012) (proposed withdrawal of approval of South
Coast VMT emissions offset demonstrations). In
section III.F of this document, we are addressing the
first element of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) (i.e., the
VMT emissions offset requirement). In sections III.E
and D of this document, we are proposing to
approve the RFP and attainment demonstrations,
respectively, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley, and compliance with the second
and third elements of section 182(d)(1)(A) is
predicated on final approval of the RFP and
attainment demonstrations.
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
additional transportation control
measures are required whenever vehicle
emissions are projected to be higher
than they would have been had VMT
not increased, even when aggregate
vehicle emissions are actually
decreasing.106 In response to the court’s
decision, in August 2012, the EPA
issued a memorandum titled
‘‘Implementing Clean Air Act Section
182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control
Measures and Transportation Control
Strategies to Offset Growth in Emissions
Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles
Travelled’’ (‘‘August 2012
Guidance’’).107
The August 2012 Guidance discusses
the meaning of ‘‘transportation control
strategies’’ (TCS) and ‘‘transportation
control measures’’ (TCM) and
recommends that both TCSs and TCMs
be included in the calculations made for
the purpose of determining the degree to
which any hypothetical growth in
emissions due to growth in VMT should
be offset. Generally, TCS is a broad term
that encompasses many types of
controls (including, for example, motor
vehicle emissions limitations, I/M
programs, alternative fuel programs,
other technology-based measures, and
TCMs) that would fit within the
regulatory definition of ‘‘control
106 See Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA,
632 F.3d. 584, at 596–597 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted
as amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 668,
further amended February 13, 2012 (‘‘Association of
Irritated Residents’’).
107 Memorandum dated August 30, 2012, Karl
Simon, Director, Transportation and Climate
Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
to Carl Edland, Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah
Jordan, Director, Air Division, EPA Region 9.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2966
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
strategy.’’ 108 A TCM is defined at 40
CFR 51.100(r) as ‘‘any measure that is
directed toward reducing emissions of
air pollutants from transportation
sources,’’ including, but not limited to,
those listed in section 108(f) of the
Clean Air Act. TCMs generally refer to
programs intended to reduce VMT,
number of vehicle trips, or traffic
congestion, such as programs for
improved public transit, designation of
certain lanes for passenger buses and
high-occupancy vehicles, and trip
reduction ordinances.
The August 2012 Guidance explains
how states may demonstrate that the
VMT emissions offset requirement is
satisfied in conformance with the
Court’s ruling in Association of Irritated
Residents. Under the August 2012
Guidance, states would develop one
emissions inventory for the base year
and three different emissions inventory
scenarios for the attainment year. For
the attainment year, the state would
present three emissions estimates, two
of which would represent hypothetical
emissions scenarios that would provide
the basis to identify the ‘‘growth in
emissions’’ due solely to the growth in
VMT, and one that would represent
projected actual motor vehicle
emissions after fully accounting for
projected VMT growth and offsetting
emissions reductions obtained by all
creditable TCSs and TCMs. See the
August 2012 Guidance for specific
details on how states might conduct the
calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions
should be calculated using VMT in that
year, and it should reflect all
enforceable TCSs and TCMs in place in
the base year. This would include
vehicle emissions standards, state and
local control programs, such as I/M
programs or fuel rules, and any
additional implemented TCSs and
TCMs that were already required by or
credited in the SIP as of that base year.
The first of the emissions calculations
for the attainment year would be based
on the projected VMT and trips for that
year and assume that no new TCSs or
TCMs beyond those already credited in
the base year inventory have been put
in place since the base year. This
calculation demonstrates how emissions
would hypothetically change if no new
TCSs or TCMs were implemented, and
VMT and trips were allowed to grow at
the projected rate from the base year.
This estimate would show the potential
for an increase in emissions due solely
to growth in VMT and trips. This
represents a ‘‘no action’’ scenario.
Emissions in the attainment year in this
108 See,
e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
scenario may be lower than those in the
base year due to the fleet that was on the
road in the base year gradually being
replaced through fleet turnover;
however, provided VMT and/or
numbers of vehicle trips will in fact
increase by the attainment year, they
would still likely be higher than they
would have been assuming VMT had
held constant.
The second of the attainment year’s
emissions calculations would assume
that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond
those already credited have been put in
place since the base year, but it would
also assume that there was no growth in
VMT and trips between the base year
and attainment year. This estimate
reflects the hypothetical emissions level
that would have occurred if no further
TCMs or TCSs had been put in place
and if VMT and trip levels had held
constant since the base year. Like the
‘‘no action’’ attainment year estimate
described above, emissions in the
attainment year may be lower than those
in the base year due to the fleet that was
on the road in the base year gradually
being replaced by cleaner vehicles
through fleet turnover, but in this case
they would not be influenced by any
growth in VMT or trips. This emissions
estimate would reflect a ceiling on the
attainment emissions that should be
allowed to occur under the statute as
interpreted by the court in Association
of Irritated Residents because it shows
what would happen under a scenario in
which no offsetting TCSs or TCMs have
yet been put in place and VMT and trips
are held constant during the period from
the area’s base year to its attainment
year. This represents a ‘‘VMT offset
ceiling’’ scenario. These two
hypothetical status quo estimates are
necessary steps in identifying the target
level of emissions from which states
would determine whether further TCMs
or TCSs, beyond those that have been
adopted and implemented in reality,
would need to be adopted and
implemented in order to fully offset any
increase in emissions due solely to VMT
and trips identified in the ‘‘no action’’
scenario.
Finally, the state would present the
emissions that are actually expected to
occur in the area’s attainment year after
taking into account reductions from all
enforceable TCSs and TCMs. This
estimate would be based on the VMT
and trip levels expected to occur in the
attainment year (i.e., the VMT and trip
levels from the first estimate) and all of
the TCSs and TCMs expected to be in
place and for which the SIP will take
credit in the area’s attainment year,
including any TCMs and TCSs put in
place since the base year. This
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
represents the ‘‘projected actual’’
attainment year scenario. If this
emissions estimate is less than or equal
to the emissions ceiling that was
established in the second of the
attainment year calculations, the TCSs
or TCMs for the attainment year would
be sufficient to fully offset the identified
hypothetical growth in emissions.
If, instead, the estimated projected
actual attainment year emissions are
still greater than the ceiling which was
established in the second of the
attainment year emissions calculations,
even after accounting for post-baseline
year TCSs and TCMs, the state would
need to adopt and implement additional
TCSs or TCMs to further offset the
growth in emissions. The additional
TCSs or TCMs would need to bring the
actual emissions down to at least the
VMT offset ceiling estimated in the
second of the attainment year
calculations, in order to meet the VMT
offset requirement of section
182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by the Court.
2. Summary of State’s Submission
CARB prepared the VMT emissions
offset demonstration for the Coachella
Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and
the District included it in Chapter 7 of
the 2016 AQMP.109 In addition to the
VMT emissions offset demonstration,
Appendix VI–E of the 2016 AQMP
includes two attachments—one listing
the TCSs adopted by CARB since 1990
and another listing the TCMs developed
by SCAG (as of September 2014) in the
South Coast. As described above in
section III.C.2.b, none of these TCMs
apply in the Coachella Valley.110
For the VMT emissions offset
demonstration, CARB used
EMFAC2014, the latest EPA-approved
motor vehicle emissions model for
California available at the time the 2016
AQMP was developed.111 The
EMFAC2014 model estimates the onroad emissions from two combustion
processes (i.e., running exhaust and
start exhaust) and four evaporative
processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses,
diurnal losses, and resting losses). The
EMFAC2014 model combines trip-based
VMT data from the regional
transportation planning agency (i.e.,
SCAG), starts data based on household
travel surveys, and vehicle population
data from the California Department of
Motor Vehicles. These sets of data are
109 2016
AQMP, 7–32.
VI–E, Attachments VI–E–1 and 2.
111 On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved and
announced the availability of EMFAC2017, the
latest update to the EMFAC model for use by State
and local governments to meet CAA requirements.
See 84 FR 41717.
110 Appendix
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2967
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
combined with corresponding emission
rates to calculate emissions.
Emissions from running exhaust, start
exhaust, hot soak, and running losses
are a function of how much a vehicle is
driven. Emissions from these processes
are thus directly related to VMT and
vehicle trips, and CARB included these
emissions in the calculations that
provide the basis for the Coachella
Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration. CARB did not include
emissions from resting loss and diurnal
loss processes in the analysis because
such emissions are related to vehicle
population, not to VMT or vehicle trips,
and thus are not part of ‘‘any growth in
emissions from growth in vehicle miles
traveled or numbers of vehicle trips in
such area’’ under CAA section
182(d)(1)(A).
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstration uses a 2012 base
year. The base year for VMT emissions
offset demonstration purposes should
generally be the same base year used for
nonattainment planning purposes. In
section III.A of this document, the EPA
is proposing to approve the 2012 base
year inventory for the Coachella Valley
for the purposes of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, and thus, CARB’s selection of
2012 as the base year for the Coachella
Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS is appropriate.
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstration also includes the
previously described three different
attainment year scenarios (i.e., no
action, VMT offset ceiling, and
projected actual). The 2016 AQMP
provides a demonstration of attainment
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley by the applicable
attainment date, based on the controlled
2026 emissions inventory. As described
in section III.D of this document, the
EPA is proposing to approve the
attainment demonstration for the 2008
ozone NAAQS for the Coachella Valley,
and thus, we find CARB’s selection of
year 2026 as the attainment year for the
VMT emissions offset demonstration for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS to be
acceptable.
Table 6 summarizes the relevant
distinguishing parameters for each of
the emissions scenarios and shows
CARB’s corresponding VOC emissions
estimates for the demonstration for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
TABLE 6—VMT EMISSIONS OFFSET INVENTORY SCENARIOS AND RESULTS FOR 2008 OZONE NAAQS
VMT
Starts
Controls
VOC
Emissions
Year
tpd
Scenario
Year
Base Year ................................................
No Action .................................................
VMT Offset Ceiling ...................................
Projected Actual .......................................
1,000/day
2012
2026
2012
2026
Year
11,403
14,977
11,403
14,977
1,000/day
2012
2026
2012
2026
2,007
2,738
2,007
2,738
2012
2012
2012
2026
4.8
3.1
2.5
2.0
Source: 2016 AQMP, Tables 7–9 and 7–10.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
For the base year scenario, CARB ran
the EMFAC2014 model for the 2012
base year using VMT and starts data
corresponding to that year. As shown in
Table 6, CARB estimates the Coachella
Valley VOC emissions at 4.8 tpd in
2012.
For the ‘‘no action’’ scenario, CARB
first identified the on-road motor
vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs 112)
put in place since the base year and
incorporated into EMFAC2014, and
then ran EMFAC2014 with the VMT and
starts data corresponding to the 2026
attainment year without the emissions
reductions from the on-road motor
vehicle control programs put in place
after the base year. Thus, the no action
scenario reflects the hypothetical VOC
emissions in the attainment year if
CARB had not put in place any
additional TCSs after 2012. As shown in
112 As discussed in section III.C.2.b and C.3 of
today’s notice, because of the significant influence
of pollutant transport from the South Coast Air
Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella Valley,
no TCMs are reasonably available for
implementation in the Coachella Valley for the
purposes of meeting the RACM requirement and
neither the District nor CARB rely on
implementation of any TCMs in the Coachella
Valley to demonstrate implementation of RACM in
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. Similarly, no
TCMs are included in the VMT emissions offset
demonstration for the Coachella Valley.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
Table 6, CARB estimates the ‘‘no action’’
Coachella Valley VOC emissions at 3.1
tpd in 2026.
For the ‘‘VMT offset ceiling’’ scenario,
CARB ran the EMFAC2014 model for
the attainment year but with VMT and
starts data corresponding to base year
values. Like the no action scenario, the
EMFAC2014 model was adjusted to
reflect the VOC emissions levels in the
attainment years without the benefits of
the post-base-year on-road motor
vehicle control programs. Thus, the
VMT offset ceiling scenario reflects
hypothetical VOC emissions in the
Coachella Valley if CARB had not put in
place any TCSs after the base year and
if there had been no growth in VMT or
vehicle trips between the base year and
the attainment year.
The hypothetical growth in emissions
due to growth in VMT and trips can be
determined from the difference between
the VOC emissions estimates under the
‘‘no action’’ scenario and the
corresponding estimates under the
‘‘VMT offset ceiling’’ scenario. Based on
the values in Table 6, the hypothetical
growth in emissions due to growth in
VMT and trips in the Coachella Valley
would have been 0.6 tpd (i.e., 3.1 tpd
minus 2.5 tpd). This hypothetical
difference establishes the level of VMT
growth-caused emissions that need to be
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
offset by the combination of postbaseline year TCSs and any necessary
additional TCSs.
For the ‘‘projected actual’’ scenario
calculation, CARB ran the EMFAC2014
model for the attainment year with VMT
and starts data at attainment year values
and with the full benefits of the relevant
post-baseline year motor vehicle control
programs. For this scenario, CARB
included the emissions benefits from
TCSs put in place since the base year.
Between 2015 and 2026, VOC emissions
from light-duty passenger vehicles in
the Coachella Valley are projected to
decline an additional 54 percent.113 The
most significant measures reducing VOC
emissions during the 2012 to 2026
timeframe include the Advanced Clean
Cars program, Zero Emission Vehicle
requirements, and more stringent onboard diagnostics requirements.114
113 Staff Report, ARB Review of the 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air
Basin and Coachella Valley, Release Date: March 7,
2017, Appendix C, Coachella Valley Weight of
Evidence, C–9.
114 Attachment V–E–1 to Appendix VI of the 2016
AQMP includes a list of the State’s transportation
control strategies adopted by CARB since 1990.
Also see EPA final action on CARB mobile source
SIP submittals at 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82
FR 14446 (March 21, 2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May
18, 2018).
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2968
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
As shown in Table 6, the projected
actual attainment-year VOC emissions
are 2.0 tpd. CARB compared this value
against the corresponding VMT offset
ceiling value to determine whether
additional TCSs or TCMs would need to
be adopted and implemented in order to
offset any increase in emissions due
solely to VMT and trips. Because the
projected actual emissions are less than
the corresponding VMT offset ceiling
emissions, CARB concluded that the
demonstration shows compliance with
the VMT emissions offset requirement
and that the adopted TCSs are sufficient
to offset the growth in emissions from
the growth in VMT and vehicle trips in
the Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
Based on our review of Coachella
Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration in Chapter 7 of the 2016
AQMP, we find CARB’s analysis to be
consistent with our August 2012
Guidance and consistent with the
emissions and vehicle activity estimates
provided by CARB in support of the
2016 AQMP. We agree that CARB and
SCAG have adopted sufficient TCSs to
offset the growth in emissions from
growth in VMT and vehicle trips in the
Coachella Valley for the purposes of the
2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, we
propose to approve the Coachella Valley
VMT emissions offset demonstration
element of the Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A).
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
G. Contingency Measures
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
Under the CAA, SIPs for 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas classified under
subpart 2 as Moderate or above must
include contingency measures
consistent with sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9). Contingency measures are
additional controls or measures to be
implemented in the event an area fails
to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by
the attainment date. The SIP should
contain trigger mechanisms for the
contingency measures, specify a
schedule for implementation, and
indicate that the measure will be
implemented without significant further
action by the state or the EPA.115
Neither the CAA nor the EPA’s
implementing regulations establish a
specific level of emissions reductions
that implementation of contingency
115 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). See also
2008 Ozone SRR, 80 FR 12264, 12285 (March 6,
2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
measures must achieve, but the EPA’s
2008 Ozone SRR reiterates the EPA’s
policy that contingency measures
should provide for emissions reductions
approximately equivalent to one year’s
worth progress, amounting to reductions
of 3 percent of the baseline emissions
inventory for the nonattainment area.116
It has been the EPA’s longstanding
interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9)
that states may meet the contingency
measure requirement by relying on
federal measures (e.g., federal mobile
source measures based on the
incremental turnover of the motor
vehicle fleet each year) and local
measures already scheduled for
implementation that provide emissions
reductions in excess of those needed to
provide for RFP or expeditious
attainment. The key is that the Act
requires that contingency measures
provide for additional emissions
reductions that are not relied on for RFP
or attainment and that are not included
in the RFP or attainment demonstrations
as meeting part or all of the contingency
measure requirements. The purpose of
contingency measures is to provide
continued emissions reductions while a
plan is being revised to meet the missed
milestone or attainment date.
The EPA has approved numerous SIPs
under this interpretation—i.e., SIPs that
use as contingency measures one or
more federal or local measures that are
in place and provide reductions in
excess of the reductions required by the
attainment demonstration or RFP
plan,117 and there is case law
supporting the EPA’s interpretation in
this regard.118 However, in Bahr v. EPA,
the Ninth Circuit rejected the EPA’s
interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9)
as allowing for early implementation of
contingency measures.119 The Ninth
Circuit concluded that contingency
measures must take effect at the time the
area fails to make RFP or attain by the
applicable attainment date, not
before.120 Thus, within the geographic
jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, states
116 80
FR 12264, 12285 (March 6, 2015).
e.g., 62 FR 15844 (April 3, 1997) (direct
final rule approving an Indiana ozone SIP revision);
62 FR 66279 (December 18, 1997) (final rule
approving an Illinois ozone SIP revision); 66 FR
30811 (June 8, 2001) (direct final rule approving a
Rhode Island ozone SIP revision); 66 FR 586
(January 3, 2001) (final rule approving District of
Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia ozone SIP
revisions); and 66 FR 634 (January 3, 2001) (final
rule approving a Connecticut ozone SIP revision).
118 See, e.g., LEAN v. EPA, 382 F.3d 575 (5th Cir.
2004) (upholding contingency measures that were
previously required and implemented where they
were in excess of the attainment demonstration and
RFP SIP).
119 Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d at 1235–1237 (9th Cir.
2016).
120 Id. at 1235–1237.
117 See,
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cannot rely on early-implemented
measures to comply with the
contingency measure requirements
under CAA section 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9).121
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
The District and CARB had largely
completed preparation of the 2016
AQMP prior to the Bahr v. EPA
decision, and thus, it relies solely upon
surplus emissions reductions from
already implemented control measures
in the milestone and attainment years to
demonstrate compliance with the
contingency measure requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).122
In the 2018 SIP Update, CARB revised
the RFP demonstration for the 2008
ozone NAAQS for several districts,
including the Coachella Valley, and
recalculated the extent of surplus
emission reductions (i.e., surplus to
meeting the RFP milestone requirement
for a given milestone year) in the
milestone years. In light of the Bahr v.
EPA decision, however, the 2018 SIP
Update does not rely on the surplus or
incremental emissions reductions to
comply with the contingency measures
requirements of sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9) but, to provide context in
which to review contingency measures
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2018
SIP Update documents the extent to
which future baseline emissions would
provide surplus emissions reductions
beyond those required to meet
applicable RFP milestones. More
specifically, the 2018 SIP Update
identifies one year’s worth of RFP as
approximately 0.5 tpd of VOC and
estimates surplus NOX reductions as
ranging from approximately 10.1 tpd to
12.8 tpd depending upon the particular
RFP milestone year.123 For attainment
contingency, the 2018 SIP Update
identifies anticipated reductions from
the State’s mobile source programs
between 2026 and 2027.124
To comply with sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9), as interpreted in the Bahr v.
EPA decision, a state must develop,
adopt and submit a contingency
measure to be triggered upon a failure
to meet RFP milestones or failure to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable
121 The Bahr v. EPA decision involved a challenge
to an EPA approval of contingency measures under
the general nonattainment area plan provisions for
contingency measures in CAA section 172(c)(9), but
given the similarity between the statutory language
in section 172(c)(9) and the ozone-specific
contingency measure provision in section 182(c)(9),
we find that the decision affects how both sections
of the Act must be interpreted.
122 2016 AQMP, 4–51 and 4–52; Appendix VI–C,
pages V–C–1 to V–C–4.
123 2018 SIP Update, tables VII–2 and VII–5.
124 2018 SIP Update, Table VII–6.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
attainment date regardless of the extent
to which already-implemented
measures would achieve surplus
emissions reductions beyond those
necessary to meet RFP milestones and
beyond those predicted to achieve
attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, to
fully address the contingency measure
requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
in the Coachella Valley, the District has
committed to develop, adopt and submit
a contingency measure to CARB in
sufficient time to allow CARB to submit
the contingency measure as a SIP
revision to the EPA within 12 months of
the EPA’s final conditional approval of
the contingency measure element of the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.125
The District’s specific commitment is to
modify one or more existing rules, or
adopt a new rule or rules, to include a
more stringent requirement or remove
an exemption if the EPA determines that
the Coachella Valley nonattainment area
has missed an RFP milestone for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. More specifically,
the District has identified a list of 8
different rules that the District is
reviewing for inclusion of potential
contingency provisions. The rules and
the types of revisions under review for
contingency purposes include, among
others: amending existing Rule 1110.2
(‘‘Emissions from Gaseous- and LiquidFueled Engines’’) to remove exemptions
for orchard wind machines powered by
internal combustion engines and
agricultural stationary engines;
amending existing Rule 1134
(‘‘Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from
Stationary Gas Turbines’’) to require
more stringent NOX limits for outer
continental shelf turbines and produced
gas turbines and/or remove or limit the
exemptions for near-limit and low-use
turbines; and adopting new Rule 1150.3
(‘‘NOX Reductions from Combustion
Equipment at Landfills’’) to require
more stringent NOX limits through use
of gas clean-up or other technologies.
CARB has separately committed to
adopt and submit the District’s revised
rule(s) to the EPA within one year of the
EPA’s final action on the contingency
measures element of the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP.126
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
Sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9)
require contingency measures to address
potential failure to achieve RFP
125 Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne
Nastri, SCAQMD Executive Officer, to Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB.
126 Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Michael
Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality and Science Division,
CARB, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, EPA
Region IX.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
milestones or failure to attain the
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date. For the purposes of evaluating the
contingency measure element of the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP, we
find it useful to distinguish between
contingency measures to address
potential failure to achieve RFP
milestones (‘‘RFP contingency
measures’’) and contingency measures
to address potential failure to attain the
NAAQS (‘‘attainment contingency
measures’’).
With respect to the RFP contingency
measures requirement, we have
reviewed the surplus emissions
estimates in each of the RFP milestone
years, as shown in the 2018 SIP Update,
and find that the calculations are
correct. We therefore agree that the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP provides
surplus emissions reductions well
beyond those necessary to demonstrate
RFP in all of the RFP milestone years.
While such surplus emissions
reductions in the RFP milestone years
do not represent contingency measures
themselves, we believe they are relevant
in evaluating the adequacy of RFP
contingency measures that are
submitted (or will be submitted) to meet
the requirements of sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9).
In this case, the District and CARB
have committed to develop, adopt, and
submit a revised District rule or rules,
or a new rule or rules, as an RFP
contingency measure within one year of
our final action on the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP. The specific types of
revisions the District has committed to
make upon an RPF milestone failure,
such as increasing the stringency of an
existing requirement or removing an
exemption, would comply with the
requirements in CAA sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9) because they would be
undertaken if the area fails to meet an
RFP milestone and would take effect
without significant further action by the
state or the EPA.
Neither the CAA nor the EPA’s
implementing regulations for the ozone
NAAQS establish a specific amount of
emissions reductions that
implementation of contingency
measures must achieve, but we
generally expect that contingency
measures should provide for emissions
reductions approximately equivalent to
one year’s worth of RFP, which, for
ozone, amounts to reductions of 3
percent of the baseline emissions
inventory for the nonattainment area.
For the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley, one year’s worth of
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2969
RFP is approximately 0.5 tpd of VOC or
0.9 tpd of NOX reductions.127
In this instance, because of the nature
of the District’s intended contingency
measure (i.e., to modify an existing rule
or rules to increase the stringency or to
remove an exemption), the District did
not quantify the potential additional
emission reductions from its
contingency measure commitment, but
we believe that it is unlikely that the
RFP and attainment contingency
measures, once adopted and submitted,
will in themselves achieve one year’s
worth of RFP (i.e., 0.5 tpd of VOC or 0.9
tpd of NOX) given the types of rule
revisions under consideration and the
magnitude of emissions reductions
constituting one year’s worth of RFP.
However, the 2018 SIP Update provides
the larger SIP planning context in which
to judge the adequacy of the to-besubmitted District contingency measure
by calculating the surplus emissions
reductions estimated to be achieved in
the RFP milestone years and the
attainment year. Table VII–2 in the 2018
SIP Update identifies estimates of
surplus NOX reductions in the
Coachella Valley for each RFP milestone
year. These estimates range from 33.9
percent in milestone year 2017 to 42.9
percent in milestone year 2023.128
These values far eclipse one year’s
worth of RFP (i.e., 3 percent,
approximately 0.5 tpd of VOC or 0.9 tpd
NOX) and provide the basis to conclude
that the risk of any failure to achieve an
RFP milestone for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley is very
low. The surplus reflects already
implemented regulations and is
primarily the result of vehicle turnover,
which refers to the ongoing replacement
by individuals, companies, and
government agencies of older, more
polluting vehicles and engines with
newer vehicles and engines designed to
meet more stringent CARB mobile
source emission standards. In light of
the extent of surplus NOX emissions
reductions in the RFP milestone years,
the emissions reductions from the
District contingency measure would be
sufficient to meet the contingency
measure requirements of the CAA with
respect to RFP milestones, even though
the measure would likely achieve
emissions reductions lower than the
EPA normally recommends for
reductions from such a measure.
For the attainment contingency
measure, CARB estimated 0.31 tpd of
127 The 2011 baseline for NO and VOC is 29.8
X
tpd and 16.9 tpd, respectively, as shown in tables
VII–1 and VII–2 of the 2018 SIP Update. Three
percent of the baselines is 0.9 tpd of NOX and 0.5
tpd of VOC, respectively.
128 2018 SIP Update, Table VII–2.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2970
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
NOX and 0.01 tpd VOC surplus
reductions in 2027,129 which is short of
the one year’s worth of reductions
necessary. We are not proposing action
on the attainment contingency measures
at this time. Attainment contingency
measures are a distinct provision of the
CAA that we may act on separately from
the attainment requirements.
For these reasons, we propose to
approve conditionally the RFP
contingency measure element of the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP as
supplemented by commitments from the
District and CARB to adopt and submit
contingency measures to meet the RFP
and attainment contingency measure
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9). Our proposed approval is
conditional because it relies upon
commitments to adopt and submit
specific enforceable contingency
measures (i.e., revised or new District
rule or rules with contingent
provisions). Conditional approvals are
authorized under CAA section 110(k)(4)
of the CAA. We are not proposing action
on the attainment contingency measure
at this time.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
federal actions in nonattainment and
maintenance areas to conform to the
SIP’s goals of eliminating or reducing
the severity and number of violations of
the NAAQS and achieving timely
attainment of the standards. Conformity
to the SIP’s goals means that such
actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute
to violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen
the severity of an existing violation, or
(3) delay timely attainment of any
NAAQS or any interim milestone.
Actions involving Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) or Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funding
or approval are subject to the EPA’s
transportation conformity rule, codified
at 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Under this
rule, metropolitan planning
organizations in nonattainment and
maintenance areas coordinate with state
and local air quality and transportation
agencies, the EPA, the FHWA, and the
FTA to demonstrate that an area’s
regional transportation plans and
transportation improvement programs
conform to the applicable SIP. This
demonstration is typically done by
showing that estimated emissions from
existing and planned highway and
transit systems are less than or equal to
129 2026 baseline emissions minus 2027 baseline
emissions. See 2018 SIP Update, Table VII–6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
the motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs or ‘‘budgets’’) contained in all
control strategy SIPs. Budgets are
generally established for specific years
and specific pollutants or precursors.
Ozone plans should identify budgets for
on-road emissions of ozone precursors
(NOX and VOC) in the area for each RFP
milestone year and, if the plan
demonstrates attainment, the attainment
year.130
For budgets to be approvable, they
must meet, at a minimum, the EPA’s
adequacy criteria at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
To meet these requirements, the budgets
must be consistent with the attainment
and RFP requirements and reflect all of
the motor vehicle control measures
contained in the attainment and RFP
demonstrations.131
The EPA’s process for determining
adequacy of a budget consists of three
basic steps: (1) Providing public
notification of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to
comment on the budget during a public
comment period; and, (3) making a
finding of adequacy or inadequacy.132
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
The 2016 AQMP includes budgets for
the 2018, 2021, and 2024 RFP milestone
years, and a 2026 attainment year. The
budgets for 2018, 2021, and 2024 were
derived from the 2012 RFP baseline year
and the associated RFP milestone years.
The budgets are affected by the South
Coast II decision vacating the alternative
baseline year provision, and therefore,
the EPA has not previously acted on the
budgets. In the submittal letters for the
2016 AQMP and the 2018 SIP Update,
CARB requested that the EPA limit the
duration of our approval of the budgets
to last only until the effective date of
future EPA adequacy findings for
replacement budgets.133 On September
9, 2019, CARB provided further
explanation in connection with its
request to limit the duration of the
approval of the budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update.134
130 40
CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more
information on the transportation conformity
requirements and applicable policies on MVEBs,
please visit our transportation conformity website
at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/index.htm.
132 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
133 Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, and
letter dated December 5, 2018, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX.
134 Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Dr.
Michael T. Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality Planning
and Science Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer,
Assistant Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX.
131 40
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The 2018 SIP Update revised the RFP
demonstration consistent with the
South Coast II decision (i.e., by using a
2011 RFP baseline year) and identifies
new budgets for the Coachella Valley for
VOC and NOX for each updated RFP
milestone year through 2026. The
budgets in this 2018 SIP Update replace
all of the budgets contained in the 2016
AQMP.
Like the budgets in the 2016 AQMP,
the budgets in the 2018 SIP Update were
calculated using EMFAC2014, the
version of CARB’s EMFAC model
approved by the EPA for estimating
emissions from on-road vehicles
operating in California at the time the
2016 AQMP and 2018 SIP Update were
developed. However, the budgets in the
2018 SIP Update reflect updated VMT
estimates from the 2016 RTP/SCS 135
and are rounded up to the nearest tenth
tpd, instead of the nearest whole
number. Accordingly, the updated
budgets are more precise, and they align
with the emissions inventory, RFP and
attainment demonstrations in the 2016
AQMP.136 The conformity budgets for
NOX and VOC in the 2018 SIP Update
for the Coachella Valley are provided in
Table 7 below.
TABLE 7—TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETS FOR THE 2008
OZONE NAAQS IN THE COACHELLA
VALLEY
[Summer planning inventory, tpd]
Budget Year
2020 ..........................
2023 ..........................
2026 ..........................
VOC
I
3.7
3.3
3.0
NOX
8.4
4.6
4.2
Source: Table VII–3 of the 2018 SIP
Update.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
As part of our review of the
approvability of the budgets in the 2018
SIP Update, we have evaluated the
budgets using our adequacy criteria in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). We will
complete the adequacy review
concurrently with our final action on
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.
The EPA is not required under its
transportation conformity rule to find
budgets adequate prior to proposing
135 2016 RTP/SCS, Amendment 2, adopted by
SCAG in July 2017.
136 For instance, the 2016 AQMP estimates that
2026 on-road vehicle emissions (summer planning
inventory) would be 2.93 tpd for VOC and 4.12 tpd
for NOX. See Appendix A, page A–23 through A–
26. The corresponding budgets from the 2018 SIP
Update are 3.0 tpd for VOC and 4.2 tpd for NOX.
See Table 5 and surrounding discussion in Section
V of the TSD for this action for additional detail.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
approval of them.137 Today, the EPA is
announcing that the adequacy process
for these budgets begins and the public
has 30 days to comment on their
adequacy, per the transportation
conformity regulation at 40 CFR
93.118(f)(2)(i) and (ii).
As documented in Table 4 of section
V of the EPA’s TSD for this proposal, we
preliminarily conclude that the budgets
in the 2018 SIP Update for the Coachella
Valley meet each adequacy criterion.
We have completed our detailed review
of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
and are proposing herein to approve the
SIP revision’s attainment and RFP
demonstrations. We have also reviewed
the budgets in the 2018 SIP Update and
found that they are consistent with the
attainment and RFP demonstrations for
which we are proposing approval, are
based on control measures that have
already been adopted and implemented,
and meet all other applicable statutory
and regulatory requirements, including
the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR
93.1118(e)(4) and (5). Therefore, we are
proposing to approve the 2020, 2023,
and 2026 budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update (and shown in Table 7, above).
At the point when we finalize our
adequacy process or approve the
budgets for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in
the 2018 SIP Update as proposed
(whichever occurs first; note that they
could also occur concurrently per 40
CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii)), then they will
replace the budgets that we previously
found adequate for use in transportation
conformity determinations.138
Under our transportation conformity
rule, as a general matter, once budgets
are approved, they cannot be
superseded by revised budgets
submitted for the same CAA purpose
and the same year(s) addressed by the
previously approved SIP submittal until
the EPA approves the revised budgets as
a SIP revision. In other words, as a
general matter, such approved budgets
cannot be superseded by revised
budgets found adequate, but rather only
through approval of the revised budgets,
unless the EPA specifies otherwise in its
approval of a SIP by limiting the
137 Under the transportation conformity
regulations, the EPA may review the adequacy of
submitted motor vehicle emission budgets
simultaneously with the EPA’s approval or
disapproval of the submitted implementation plan.
40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
138 We found adequate the budgets from the 2008
Ozone Early Progress Plan for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS at 73 FR 25694 (May 7, 2008). The budgets
in the 2018 SIP Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
are lower than the corresponding budgets approved
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. For instance, the
current budgets of 7 tpd for VOC and 26 tpd for
NOX for all years, would be replaced by budgets of
3.7 tpd for VOC and 8.4 tpd for NOX in 2020, and
3.3 tpd for VOC and 4.6 tpd for NOX in 2023.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
duration of the approval to last only
until subsequently submitted budgets
are found adequate.139
In this instance, CARB has requested
that we limit the duration of our
approval of the budgets in the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP only until
the effective date of the EPA’s adequacy
finding for any subsequently submitted
budgets, and in September 2019, CARB
provided further explanation for its
request.140 Generally, we will consider
a state’s request to limit an approval of
a budget only if the request includes the
following elements: 141
• An acknowledgement and
explanation as to why the budgets under
consideration have become outdated or
deficient;
• A commitment to update the
budgets as part of a comprehensive SIP
update; and
• A request that the EPA limit the
duration of its approval to the time
when new budgets have been found to
be adequate for transportation
conformity purposes.
CARB’s request includes an
explanation for why the budgets have
become, or will become, outdated or
deficient. In short, CARB has requested
that we limit the duration of the
approval of the budgets in light of the
EPA’s recent approval of EMFAC2017,
an updated version of the model
(EMFAC2014) used for the budgets in
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.142
EMFAC2017 updates vehicle mix and
emissions data of the previously
approved version of the model,
EMFAC2014.
Preliminary calculations by CARB
indicate that EMFAC2017-derived
motor vehicle emissions estimates for
the Coachella Valley will exceed the
corresponding EMFAC2014-derived
budgets in the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP. In light of the approval of
EMFAC2017, CARB explains that the
budgets from the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP, for which we are proposing
approval in today’s action, will become
outdated and will need to be revised
using EMFAC2017. In addition, CARB
states that, without the ability to replace
139 40
CFR 93.118(e)(1).
request to limit the duration of the
approval of the Coachella Valley ozone MVEB is
contained in a letter dated September 9, 2019, from
Michael Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality and Science
Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate
Director, EPA Region IX.
141 67 FR 69141 (November 15, 2002), limiting
our prior approval of MVEB in certain California
SIPs.
142 On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved and
announced the availability of EMFAC2017, the
latest update to the EMFAC model for use by State
and local governments to meet CAA requirements.
See 84 FR 41717.
140 CARB’s
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2971
the budgets using the budget adequacy
process, the benefits of using the
updated data may not be realized for a
year or more after the updated SIP
revision (with the EMFAC2017-derived
budgets) is submitted, due to the length
of the SIP approval process. We find
that CARB’s explanation for limiting the
duration of the approval of the budgets
is appropriate and provides us with a
reasonable basis on which to limit the
duration of the approval of the budgets.
We note that CARB has not
committed to update the budgets as part
of a comprehensive SIP update, but as
a practical matter, CARB must submit a
SIP revision that includes updated
demonstrations as well as the updated
budgets to meet the adequacy criteria in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4); 143 and thus, we do
not need a specific commitment for
such a plan at this time. For the reasons
provided above, and in light of CARB’s
explanation for why the budgets will
become outdated and should be
replaced upon an adequacy finding for
updated budgets, we propose to limit
the duration of our approval of the
budgets in the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP until we find revised budgets
based on EMFAC2017 to be adequate.
I. Other Clean Air Act Requirements
Applicable to Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
In addition to the SIP requirements
discussed in the previous sections, the
CAA includes certain other SIP
requirements applicable to Severe ozone
nonattainment areas, such as the
Coachella Valley. We describe these
provisions and their current status
below.
1. Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Programs
Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires
states with ozone nonattainment areas
classified under subpart 2 as Serious or
above to implement an enhanced motor
vehicle I/M program in those areas. The
requirements for those programs are
provided in CAA section 182(c)(3) and
40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
Consistent with the 2008 Ozone SRR,
no new I/M programs are currently
required for nonattainment areas for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.144 The EPA
previously approved California’s I/M
program in Coachella Valley as meeting
143 Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), the EPA will not
find a budget in a submitted SIP to be adequate
unless, among other criteria, the budgets, when
considered together with all other emissions
sources, are consistent with applicable
requirements for RFP and attainment. 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iv).
144 2008 Ozone SRR, 80 FR 12264, at 12283
(March 6, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
2972
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the requirements of the CAA and
applicable EPA regulations for
enhanced I/M programs.145
2. New Source Review Rules
Section 182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA
requires states to develop SIP revisions
containing permit programs for each of
its ozone nonattainment areas. The SIP
revisions are to include requirements for
permits in accordance with CAA
sections 172(c)(5) and 173 for the
construction and operation of each new
or modified major stationary source for
VOC and NOX anywhere in the
nonattainment area.146 The 2008 Ozone
SRR includes provisions and guidance
for nonattainment new source review
(NSR) programs.147 The EPA has
previously approved the District’s NSR
rules as they apply to Coachella Valley
into the SIP based in part on a
conclusion that the rules adequately
addressed the NSR requirements
specific to Severe areas.148 On
December 13, 2018, the EPA approved
the District’s 2008 ozone certification
that its NSR program previously
approved into the SIP is adequate to
meet the requirements for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.149
3. Clean Fuels Fleet Program
Sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246 of the
CAA require California to submit to the
EPA for approval measures to
implement a Clean Fuels Fleet Program
in ozone nonattainment areas classified
as Serious and above. Section
182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows states to
opt out of the federal clean-fuel vehicle
fleet program by submitting a SIP
revision consisting of a program or
programs that will result in at least
equivalent long-term reductions in
ozone precursors and toxic air
emissions.
In 1994, CARB submitted a SIP
revision to the EPA to opt out of the
federal clean-fuel fleet program. The
submittal included a demonstration that
California’s low-emissions vehicle
program achieved emissions reductions
at least as large as would be achieved by
the federal program. The EPA approved
the SIP revision to opt out of the federal
program on August 27, 1999.150 There
have been no changes to the federal
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
145 75
FR 38023 (July 1, 2010).
also CAA section 182(e).
147 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
148 On December 4, 1996 (61 FR 64291), the EPA
approved SCAQMD’s NSR rules (the District’s
Regulation XIII) as satisfying the NSR requirements
in title I, part D of the CAA for Extreme (South
Coast) and Severe (Coachella Valley) ozone
nonattainment areas.
149 83 FR 64026 (December 13, 2018).
150 64 FR 46849 (August 27, 1999).
146 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
Clean Fuels Fleet program since the
EPA approved the California SIP
revision to opt out of the federal
program, and thus, no corresponding
changes to the SIP are required. Thus,
we find that the California SIP revision
to opt out of the federal program, as
approved in 1999, meets the
requirements of CAA sections
182(c)(4)(A) and 246 for Coachella
Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
4. Gasoline Vapor Recovery
Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA requires
states to submit a SIP revision by
November 15, 1992, that requires
owners or operators of gasoline
dispensing systems to install and
operate gasoline vehicle refueling vapor
recovery (‘‘Stage II’’) systems in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as
Moderate and above. California’s ozone
nonattainment areas implemented Stage
II vapor recovery well before the passage
of the CAA Amendments of 1990.151
Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA requires
the EPA to promulgate standards
requiring motor vehicles to be equipped
with onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR) systems. The EPA promulgated
the first set of ORVR system regulations
in 1994 for phased implementation on
vehicle manufacturers, and since the
end of 2006, essentially all new
gasoline-powered light and mediumduty vehicles are ORVR-equipped.152
Section 202(a)(6) also authorizes the
EPA to waive the SIP requirement under
CAA section 182(b)(3) for installation of
Stage II vapor recovery systems after
such time as the EPA determines that
ORVR systems are in widespread use
throughout the motor vehicle fleet.
Effective May 16, 2012, the EPA waived
the requirement of CAA section
182(b)(3) for Stage II vapor recovery
systems in ozone nonattainment areas
regardless of classification.153 Thus, a
SIP submittal meeting CAA section
182(b)(3) is not required for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
While a SIP submittal meeting CAA
section 182(b)(3) is not required for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, under California
state law (i.e., Health and Safety Code
section 41954), CARB is required to
adopt procedures and performance
standards for controlling gasoline
emissions from gasoline marketing
operations, including transfer and
storage operations. State law also
authorizes CARB, in cooperation with
local air districts, to certify vapor
recovery systems, to identify defective
151 General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13514 (April
16, 1992).
152 77 FR 28772, at 28774 (May 16, 2012).
153 40 CFR 51.126(b).
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
equipment and to develop test methods.
CARB has adopted numerous revisions
to its vapor recovery program
regulations and continues to rely on its
vapor recovery program to achieve
emissions reductions in ozone
nonattainment areas in California.
In the Coachella Valley, the
installation and operation of CARBcertified vapor recovery equipment is
required and enforced by SCAQMD
Rules 461 (‘‘Gasoline Transfer and
Dispensing’’) and 462 (‘‘Organic Liquid
Loading’’). These rules were most
recently approved into the SIP on April
11, 2013, and July 21, 1999,
respectively.154
5. Enhanced Ambient Air Monitoring
Section 182(c)(1) of the CAA requires
that all ozone nonattainment areas
classified as Serious or above
implement measures to enhance and
improve monitoring for ambient
concentrations of ozone, NOX, and VOC,
and to improve monitoring of emissions
of NOX and VOC. The enhanced
monitoring network for ozone is referred
to as the photochemical assessment
monitoring station (PAMS) network.
The EPA promulgated final PAMS
regulations on February 12, 1993.155
On November 10, 1993, CARB
submitted to the EPA a SIP revision
addressing the PAMS network for six
ozone nonattainment areas, including
the Southeast Desert Modified Air
Quality Maintenance Area (SE Desert
AQMA), to meet the enhanced
monitoring requirements of CAA section
182(c)(1) and the PAMS regulations for
the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The SE
Desert AQMA included portions of Los
Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino
counties, including the area that would
later be designated as the Riverside
County (Coachella Valley) ozone
nonattainment area for the 1997 and
2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA
determined that the PAMS SIP revision
met all applicable requirements for
enhanced monitoring and approved the
PAMS submittal into the California
SIP.156
The 2016 AQMP discusses
compliance with the CAA section
182(c)(1) enhanced monitoring
requirements in terms of the District’s
‘‘Annual Air Quality Monitoring
Network Plan (July 2016)’’ (ANP).157
The District’s 2016 ANP describes the
steps taken to address the requirements
of section 182(c)(1), includes
descriptions of the PAMS program and
154 78
FR 21542 and 64 FR 39037.
FR 8452 (February 12, 1993).
156 82 FR 45191 (September 28, 2017).
157 2016 AQMP, Table 6–2.
155 58
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
provides additional details about the
PAMS network.158 The EPA approved
the District’s PAMS network as part of
our annual approval of the District’s
ANP.159
Prior to 2006, the EPA’s ambient air
monitoring regulations in 40 CFR part
58 (‘‘Ambient Air Quality
Surveillance’’) set forth specific SIP
requirements (see former 40 CFR 52.20).
In 2006, the EPA significantly revised
and reorganized 40 CFR part 58.160
Under revised 40 CFR part 58, SIP
revisions are no longer required; rather,
compliance with EPA monitoring
regulations is established through
review of required annual monitoring
network plans.161 The 2008 Ozone SRR
made no changes to these
requirements.162 Therefore, based on
our review and approval of the 2016
ANP for South Coast, including the
Coachella Valley, we find that the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP adequately
addresses the enhanced monitoring
requirements under CAA section
182(c)(1), and we propose to approve
that portion of the plan.
6. CAA Section 185 Fee Program
Sections 182(d)(3) and 185 of the CAA
require that the SIP for each Severe and
Extreme ozone nonattainment area
provide that, if the area fails to attain by
its applicable attainment date, each
major stationary source of VOC and
NOX located in the area shall pay a fee
to the state as a penalty for such failure
for each calendar year beginning after
the attainment date, until the area is
redesignated as an attainment area for
ozone. States are not yet required to
submit a SIP revision that meets the
requirements of CAA section 185 for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.163
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Proposed Action
For the reasons discussed in this
notice, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the
EPA is proposing to approve as a
revision to the California SIP the
158 2016 ANP, 13–15, 28 and Appendix A, 8.
Starting in 2007, the EPA’s monitoring rules at 71
FR 61236 (October 17, 2006) required the submittal
and EPA action on ANPs. SCAQMD’s 2016 ANP
can be found in the docket for today’s action.
159 Letter dated October 31, 2016, from Gwen
Yoshimura, EPA Region IX to Matt Miyasoto,
Deputy Executive Officer, SCAQMD, approving the
2016 South Coast ANP.
160 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006).
161 40 CFR 58.2(b) now provides ‘‘The
requirements pertaining to provisions for an air
quality surveillance system in the SIP are contained
in this part.’’
162 The 2008 ozone SRR addresses PAMS-related
requirements at 80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6,
2015).
163 See 40 CFR 51.1117. For the Coachella Valley,
a section 185 SIP revision for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS will be due on July 20, 2022.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
following portions of the Final 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan submitted by
CARB on April 27, 2017, and the 2018
SIP Update submitted on December 5,
2018, that compose the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP.
• Base year emissions inventory
element in the 2016 AQMP as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections
172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1115 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
• RACM demonstration element in
the 2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.1112(c) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS;
• Attainment demonstration element
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the 2016
AQMP as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1108;
• ROP demonstration element in the
2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA 182(b)(1) and 40
CFR 51.1110(a)(2) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS;
• RFP demonstration element in the
2018 SIP Update as meeting the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2),
182(b)(1), and 182(c)(2)(B), and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS;
• VMT emissions offset
demonstration element in the 2016
AQMP as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
• Motor vehicle emissions budgets in
the 2018 SIP Update for the 2020 and
2023 RFP milestone years and the 2026
attainment year (see Table 7) because
they are consistent with the RFP and
attainment demonstrations for the 2008
ozone NAAQS proposed for approval
herein and meet the other criteria in 40
CFR 93.118(e);
• Enhanced vehicle inspection and
maintenance program element in the
2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(c)(3)
and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS;
• Clean fuels fleet program element in
the 2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA sections
182(c)(4)(A) and 246 and 40 CFR
51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; and
• Enhanced monitoring element in
the 2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 182(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.164
164 Regarding other applicable requirements for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley, the
EPA has previously approved SIP revisions that
address the nonattainment area requirements for
NSR and for implementation of RACT for the South
Coast, including the Coachella Valley, for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. See 83 FR 64026 (December 13,
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2973
With respect to the MVEBs, we are
proposing to limit the duration of the
approval of the MVEBs to last only until
the effective date of the EPA’s adequacy
finding for any subsequently submitted
budgets. We are doing so at CARB’s
request and in light of the benefits of
using EMFAC2017-derived budgets
prior to our taking final action on the
future SIP revision that includes the
updated budgets.
We are also proposing that paragraphs
(e)(1)(A) and (B), (e)(2), (e)(5) and (e)(8)
of District Rule 301 (‘‘Permitting and
Associated Fees’’), submitted to the EPA
on August 5, 2019, and approved on
October 1, 2019, at 84 FR 52005, meet
the emission statement requirements of
CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) and 40 CFR
51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Lastly, we are proposing, under CAA
section 110(k)(4), to conditionally
approve the contingency measure
element of the Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) for RFP
contingency measures. Our proposed
approval is based on commitments by
the District and CARB to supplement
the element through submission, as a
SIP revision (within one year of final
conditional approval action), of a new
or revised District rule or rules that
would include a more stringent
requirement or would remove an
exemption if an RFP milestone is not
met.165 We are not proposing action on
the attainment contingency measure at
this time.
The EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept
comments from the public on this
proposal for the next 30 days and will
consider comments before taking final
action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
2018) (NSR) and 82 FR 43850 (September 20, 2017)
(RACT). SIP revisions for the Coachella Valley
addressing the penalty fee requirements under CAA
sections 181(b)(4) and 185 are not yet due for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
165 Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne
Nastri, SCAQMD Executive Officer, to Richard
Corey, CARB Executive Officer; and letter dated
September 9, 2019, from Michael Benjamin, Chief,
Air Quality and Science Division, CARB, to Amy
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA
Region IX.
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2974
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 12 / Friday, January 17, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve, or
conditionally approve, state plans 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
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 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 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:48 Jan 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
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 19, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020–00538 Filed 1–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Parts 87 and 1050
RIN 0991–AC13
Ensuring Equal Treatment of FaithBased Organizations
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Health and Human
Services.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule would
amend the Department of Health and
Human Services’ (‘‘Department’’)
general regulations to implement
Executive Order 13831, on the
Establishment of a White House Faith
and Opportunity Initiative. This
proposed rule proposes changes to
provide clarity about the rights and
obligations of faith-based organizations
participating in Department programs,
clarify the Department’s guidance
documents for financial assistance with
regard to faith-based organizations, and
eliminate certain requirements for faithbased organizations that no longer
reflect executive branch guidance or
Supreme Court precedent. This
proposed rulemaking is intended to
ensure that the Department’s programs
are implemented in a manner consistent
with the requirements of federal law,
including the First Amendment to the
Constitution and the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act.
DATES: Comments must be received by
HHS on or before February 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to this proposed rule, identified by RIN
0991–AC13, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal. You
may submit electronic comments at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for the Docket ID number HHS–OS–
2019–0012. Follow the instructions at
https://www.regulations.gov online for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
submitting comments through this
method.
• Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail:
You may mail comments to U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services, Center for Faith and
Opportunity Initiatives (Partnership
Center), Attention: Equal Treatment
NPRM, RIN 0991–AC13, Hubert H.
Humphrey Building, Room 747D, 200
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20201.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: You may
hand deliver comments to the U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services, Center for Faith and
Opportunity Initiatives, Attention:
Equal Treatment NPRM, RIN 0991–
AC13, Hubert H. Humphrey Building,
Room 747D, 200 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20201.
All comments received by the
methods and due date specified above
will be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, and
such posting may occur before or after
the closing of the comment period.
The Department will consider all
comments received by the date and time
specified in the DATES section above;
but, because of the large number of
public comments we normally receive
on Federal Register documents, it is not
able to provide individual
acknowledgements of receipt.
Please allow sufficient time for mailed
comments to be timely received in the
event of delivery or security delays.
Electronic comments with attachments
should be in Microsoft Word or Excel;
however, we prefer Microsoft Word.
Please note that comments submitted
by fax or email and those submitted
after the comment period will not be
accepted.
Docket: For complete access to
background documents or posted
comments, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and search for
Docket ID number HHS–OS–2019–0012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Center for Faith and Opportunity
Initiatives at 202–260–6501.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Shortly after taking office in 2001,
President George W. Bush signed
Executive Order 13199, Establishment
of White House Office of Faith-Based
and Community Initiatives, 66 FR 8499
(January 29, 2001). That Executive
Order sought to ensure that ‘‘private and
charitable groups, including religious
ones . . . have the fullest opportunity
permitted by law to compete on a level
playing field’’ in the delivery of social
E:\FR\FM\17JAP1.SGM
17JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 12 (Friday, January 17, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2949-2974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00538]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0241; FRL-10003-99-Region 9]
Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California;
Coachella Valley; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, or conditionally approve, all or portions of two state
implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
California to meet Clean Air Act requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the
Coachella Valley ozone nonattainment area (``Coachella Valley''). The
two SIP revisions include the portions of the ``Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan'' and the ``2018 Updates to the California State
Implementation Plan'' that address ozone in the Coachella Valley. These
submittals address the nonattainment area requirements for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, including the requirements for an emissions
inventory, emissions statements, attainment demonstration, reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonably available control measures,
contingency measures, and motor vehicle emissions budgets. The EPA is
proposing to approve these submittals as meeting all the applicable
ozone nonattainment area requirements except for the contingency
measure requirements, for which the EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve the RFP contingency measures and to defer action on the
attainment contingency measure.
DATES: Any comments must be submitted by February 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0241 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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.
[[Page 2950]]
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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3963, or by email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations and SIPs
B. The Coachella Valley 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area
C. Clean Air Act and Regulatory Requirements for 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs
II. Submissions From the State of California To Address 2008 Ozone
Requirements in the Coachella Valley
A. Summary of Submissions
B. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements for Adoption and
Submission of SIP Revisions
III. Review of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
A. Emissions Inventories
B. Emissions Statement
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and
Control Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration
E. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstration
F. Transportation Control Strategies and Measures To Offset
Emissions Increases From Vehicle Miles Traveled
G. Contingency Measures
H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
I. Other Clean Air Act Requirements Applicable to Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Regulatory Context
A. Ozone Standards, Area Designations and SIPs
Ground-level ozone pollution is formed from the reaction of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) in the presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants,
referred to as ozone precursors, are emitted by many types of sources,
including on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State of California refers to reactive organic gases
(ROG) in some of its ozone-related SIP submissions. As a practical
matter, ROG and VOC refer to the same set of chemical constituents,
and for the sake of simplicity, we refer to this set of gases as VOC
in this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects
occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in children and adults
with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms
and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Fact Sheet--2008 Final Revisions to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' dated March 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act''), the
EPA promulgates NAAQS for pervasive air pollutants, such as ozone. The
NAAQS are concentration levels that the attainment and maintenance of
which the EPA has determined to be requisite to protect public health
and welfare. Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA
is required by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as
either attaining or not attaining the standards.
On February 8, 1979, under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA
established primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 parts per
million (ppm) averaged over a 1-hour period.\3\ On July 18, 1997, the
EPA revised the primary and secondary standards for ozone to set the
acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm averaged over
an 8-hour period (``1997 ozone NAAQS'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 44 FR 8202.
\4\ See 62 FR 38856. On April 30, 2004, the EPA designated and
classified areas of the country with respect to the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858. On July 10, 2019, the EPA granted a request
from the State of California to reclassify the Coachella Valley
ozone nonattainment area from ``Severe-15'' to ``Extreme'' for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. See 84 FR 32841.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2008, the EPA lowered the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm
(``2008 ozone NAAQS'') to replace the 1997 ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.\5\
In 2012, the EPA designated the Coachella Valley as nonattainment for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS and classified the area as ``Severe-15.'' \6\
Areas classified as Severe-15 must attain the NAAQS within 15 years of
the effective date of the nonattainment designation.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). The EPA further tightened the
8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm in 2015, but this proposed action
relates to the requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Information on
the 2015 ozone NAAQS is available at 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
\6\ 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
\7\ CAA section 181(a)(1), 40 CFR 51.1102 and 51.1103(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designations of nonattainment for a given NAAQS trigger
requirements under the CAA to prepare and submit SIP revisions. The SIP
revisions that are the subject of today's proposed action address the
Severe-15 nonattainment area requirements that apply to the Coachella
Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Under California law, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is
the state agency that is responsible for the adoption and submission to
the EPA of California SIPs and SIP revisions, and it has broad
authority to establish emissions standards and other requirements for
mobile sources. Local and regional air pollution control districts in
California are responsible for the regulation of stationary sources and
are generally responsible for the development of regional air quality
management plans (AQMPs or ``plans''). In the Coachella Valley, the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or ``District'')
develops and adopts AQMPs to address CAA planning requirements
applicable to that region. Such plans are then submitted to CARB for
adoption and submittal to the EPA as revisions to the California SIP.
B. The Coachella Valley 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Area
The Coachella Valley is located within Riverside County, and its
boundaries generally align with the Riverside County portion of the
Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). For a precise description of the
geographic boundaries of the Coachella Valley, see 40 CFR 81.305.
Prior AQMPs and state control measures developed by the District
and CARB have produced significant emissions reductions over the years
and improved air quality in the Coachella Valley. For instance, the 8-
hour ozone design value for the Coachella Valley decreased from 0.110
ppm to 0.088 ppm from 1995 to 2015, despite increases in population and
vehicular activity.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix II (``Current Air Quality''), Table A-8.
For the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the design value at any given monitoring
site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone concentration. The
maximum design value among the various ozone monitoring sites is the
design value for the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coachella Valley is downwind from the South Coast Air Basin
(``South
[[Page 2951]]
Coast'') and is subject to significant transport of ozone from that
area; both ozone nonattainment areas are regulated by the SCAQMD. The
Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan describes ozone transport from
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the South Coast as follows:
Atmospheric ozone in the Riverside county portion of the SSAB is
both directly transported from the Basin and formed photochemically
from precursors emitted upwind. The precursors are emitted in
greatest quantity in the coastal and central Los Angeles County
areas of the Basin. The Basin's prevailing sea breeze causes
polluted air to be transported inland. As the air is being
transported inland, ozone is formed, with peak concentrations
occurring in the inland valleys of the Basin, extending from eastern
San Fernando Valley through the San Gabriel Valley into the
Riverside-San Bernardino area and the adjacent mountains. As the air
is transported still further inland into the Coachella Valley
through the San Gorgonio Pass, ozone concentrations typically
decrease due to dilution, although ozone standards can still be
exceeded.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan,'' SCAQMD, March
2017, 7-9. See also 2007 AQMP, 7-23 (describing ozone transport
through the San Gorgonio Pass and citing early studies documenting
this transport).
Because of the transport from the South Coast into the Coachella
Valley, continued progress in the South Coast towards meeting the 1997
and 2008 ozone NAAQS is critical for the Coachella Valley to attain the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
C. Clean Air Act and Regulatory Requirements for 2008 Ozone
Nonattainment Area SIPs
States must implement the 2008 ozone NAAQS under title I, part D of
the CAA, including sections 171-179B of subpart 1 (``Nonattainment
Areas in General'') and sections 181-185 of subpart 2 (``Additional
Provisions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas''). To assist states in
developing effective plans to address ozone nonattainment problems, in
2015, the EPA issued a SIP Requirements Rule (SRR) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (``2008 Ozone SRR'') that addressed implementation of the 2008
standards, including attainment dates, requirements for emissions
inventories, attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP)
demonstrations, among other SIP elements, as well as the transition
from the 1997 ozone NAAQS to the 2008 ozone NAAQS and associated anti-
backsliding requirements.\10\ The regulatory requirements of the 2008
Ozone SRR are codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart AA. We discuss the
CAA and regulatory planning requirements for the elements of 2008 ozone
plans relevant to this proposal in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Anti-backsliding requirements
are the provisions applicable to revoked NAAQS (including the 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 ozone NAAQS) as described in CAA
section 172(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's 2008 Ozone SRR was challenged, and on February 16, 2018,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (``D.C. Circuit'')
published its decision in South Coast Air Quality Management District
v. EPA (``South Coast II'') \11\ vacating portions of the 2008 Ozone
SRR. The only aspect of the South Coast II decision that affects this
proposed action is the vacatur of the alternative baseline year for
RFP. More specifically, the 2008 Ozone SRR required states to develop
the baseline emissions inventory for RFP using the emissions for the
most recent calendar year for which states submit a triennial inventory
to the EPA under subpart A (``Air Emissions Reporting Requirements'')
of 40 CFR part 51, which was 2011. However, the 2008 Ozone SRR allowed
states to use an alternative year, between 2008 and 2012, for the
baseline emissions inventory provided that the state demonstrated why
the alternative baseline year was appropriate. In the South Coast II
decision, the D.C. Circuit vacated the provisions of the 2008 Ozone SRR
that allowed states to use an alternative baseline year for
demonstrating RFP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 882
F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). The term ``South Coast II'' is used in
reference to the 2018 court decision to distinguish it from a
decision published in 2006 also referred to as ``South Coast.'' The
earlier decision involved a challenge to the EPA's Phase 1
implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. South Coast Air
Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Submissions From the State of California To Address 2008 Ozone
Requirements in the Coachella Valley
A. Summary of Submissions
In this document, we are proposing action on portions of two SIP
revisions that are described in detail in the following paragraphs.
Collectively, we refer to the relevant portions of the two SIP
revisions as the ``2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.''
1. SCAQMD's 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
On April 27, 2017, CARB submitted the Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan (March 2017) (``2016 AQMP'') to the EPA as a revision
to the California SIP.\12\ The 2016 AQMP addresses the nonattainment
area requirements for the South Coast for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS, and the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, and for the Coachella Valley for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. It also updates the approved attainment
demonstrations for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS and 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for the South Coast and adds new measures to reduce the reliance
on section 182(e)(5) new technology measures to attain those standards.
On October 1, 2019, the EPA approved portions of the 2016 AQMP and
other submittals (collectively referred to as the ``2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP'') \13\ with respect to numerous requirements for the South
Coast relating to the 1979 1-hour, 1997 8-hour, and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\14\ In today's notice, we are proposing action on the portions
of the 2016 AQMP that address the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the Coachella
Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
\13\ The 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP includes five submittals:
The 2016 AQMP, the ``Revised Proposed 2016 State Strategy for the
State Implementation Plan,'' the ``2018 Updates to the California
State Implementation Plan,'' the ``Updated Federal 1979 1-Hour Ozone
Standard Attainment Demonstration,'' and a SCAQMD emissions
statement rule.
\14\ 84 FR 52005. The EPA's proposed approval of the 2016 South
Coast Ozone SIP is at 84 FR 28132 (June 17, 2019). On February 12,
2019, we approved portions of the 2016 AQMP with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS (except for the related contingency measure
element). See 84 FR 3305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP revision for the 2016 AQMP includes the various chapters
and appendices of the 2016 AQMP, described further below, plus the
District's resolution of adoption for the plan (District Resolution 17-
2) and CARB's resolution of adoption of the 2016 AQMP as a revision to
the California SIP (CARB Resolution 17-8) that includes commitments on
which the 2016 AQMP relies.\15\ With respect to ozone, the 2016 AQMP
addresses the CAA requirements for emissions inventories, air quality
modeling demonstrating attainment, reasonably available control
measures (RACM), RFP, transportation control strategies and measures,
and contingency measures for failure to make RFP, among other
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ SCAQMD Board Resolution 17-2, March 3, 2017; CARB Board
Resolution 17-8, 2016 Air Quality Management Plan for Ozone and
PM2.5 in the South Coast and the Coachella Valley, March
23, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 AQMP is organized into eleven chapters. Most of the 2016
AQMP is directly relevant to the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in
the South Coast, and our review for this action addresses only those
portions of the 2016 AQMP that address the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
[[Page 2952]]
the Coachella Valley.\16\ The Coachella Valley is located in the SSAB,
which is separate from the upwind South Coast and faces different air
quality challenges. Chapter 7, ``Current and Future Air Quality--Desert
Nonattainment Areas SIP'' of the 2016 AQMP addresses CAA requirements
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The following chapters or portions thereof in the 2016 AQMP
were submitted for information only and are not subject to review as
part of the SIP revision: The portion of Chapter 6 that is titled
``California Clean Air Act Requirements'' and that discusses
compliance with state law requirements for clean air plans; Chapter
8, ``Looking Beyond Current Requirements,'' assesses the South
Coast's status with respect to the 2015 8-hour ozone standard of
0.070 ppm; Chapter 9, ``Air Toxic Control Strategy,'' examines the
ongoing efforts to reduce health risk from toxic air contaminants,
co-benefits from reducing criteria pollutants, and potential future
actions; and Chapter 10, ``Climate and Energy,'' provides a
description of current and projected energy demand and supply issues
in the South Coast, and the relationship between air quality
improvement and greenhouse gas mitigation goals. As noted
previously, we are not taking action in this rulemaking on the
portions of the 2016 AQMP that relate only to the South Coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional chapters in the 2016 AQMP also discuss the Coachella
Valley and provide relevant background. Chapter 1, ``Introduction,''
introduces the 2016 AQMP, including its purpose, historical air quality
progress in the South Coast and Coachella Valley, and the District's
approach to air quality planning. Chapter 2, ``Air Quality and Health
Effects,'' discusses current air quality in comparison with federal
health-based air pollution standards. Chapter 4, ``Control Strategy and
Implementation,'' presents the control strategy, specific measures, and
implementation schedules to attain the air quality standards by the
specified attainment dates. Chapter 5, ``Future Air Quality,''
describes the modeling and modeled attainment demonstration. Chapter 6,
``Federal and State Clean Air Act Requirements,'' discusses specific
federal and state requirements, including anti-backsliding requirements
for revoked standards. Chapter 11, ``Public Process and
Participation,'' describes the District's public outreach effort
associated with the development of the 2016 AQMP. A glossary is
provided at the end of the document, presenting definitions of commonly
used terms found in the 2016 AQMP.
The 2016 AQMP also includes the following technical appendices:
Appendix I (``Health Effects'') presents a summary of
scientific findings on the health effects of ambient air pollutants.
Appendix II (``Current Air Quality'') contains a detailed
summary of the air quality in 2015, along with prior year trends, in
both the South Coast and the Coachella Valley.
Appendix III (``Base and Future Year Emission Inventory'')
presents the 2012 base year emissions inventory and projected emission
inventories of air pollutants in future attainment years for both
annual average and summer planning inventories in the South Coast.
Appendix IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary and Mobile Source
Control Measures'') describes SCAQMD's proposed stationary and mobile
source control measures to attain the federal ozone and
PM2.5 standards.
Appendix IV-B (``CARB's Mobile Source Strategy'')
describes CARB's proposed 2016 strategy to attain health-based federal
air quality standards.
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and
Control Measures'') describes the Southern California Association of
Governments' (SCAG) ``Final 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/
Sustainable Communities Strategy'' (2016 RTP/SCS) and transportation
control measures.
Appendix V (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations'')
provides the details of the regional modeling for the attainment
demonstration.
Appendix VI (``Compliance with Other Clean Air Act
Requirements'') provides the District's demonstration that the 2016
AQMP complies with specific CAA requirements.
Attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley is
heavily dependent on emission reductions occurring in the adjacent
South Coast. The emission reductions in the South Coast are described
in the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. As discussed in section III.D
(Attainment Demonstration) of the EPA's proposed approval of the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP,\17\ the ozone attainment demonstrations for the
1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS include commitments made by the District in
the 2016 AQMP and by CARB in the ``Revised Proposed 2016 State Strategy
for the State Implementation Plan'' (March 7, 2017) (``2016 State
Strategy''). The 2016 State Strategy does not include specific
commitments for the Coachella Valley. For details on the District and
CARB emissions reduction commitments in the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP,
see the EPA's June 17, 2019 proposed approval action at 84 FR 28132.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 84 FR 28132 (June 17, 2019). On October 1, 2019, the EPA
finalized its approval of the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. See 84 FR
52005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CARB's 2018 Updates to the California State Implementation Plan
On December 5, 2018, CARB submitted the 2018 Updates to the
California State Implementation Plan (``2018 SIP Update'') to the EPA
as a revision to the California SIP.\18\ CARB adopted the 2018 SIP
Update on October 25, 2018. CARB developed the 2018 SIP Update in
response to the court's decision in South Coast II vacating the 2008
Ozone SRR with respect to the use of an alternate baseline year for
demonstrating RFP, and to address contingency measure requirements in
the wake of the court decision in Bahr v. EPA.\19\ The 2018 SIP Update
includes updates for 8 different California ozone nonattainment areas.
We previously approved the San Joaquin Valley and South Coast portions
of the 2018 SIP Update.\20\ The 2018 SIP Update includes an RFP
demonstration using the required 2011 baseline year for the Coachella
Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Letter dated December 5, 2018, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
\19\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 2016). In this case,
the court rejected the EPA's longstanding interpretation of CAA
section 172(c)(9) as allowing for early implementation of
contingency measures. The court concluded that a contingency measure
must take effect at the time the area fails to make RFP or attain by
the applicable attainment date, not before.
\20\ 84 FR 11198 (March 25, 2019) (final approval of the San
Joaquin Valley portion of the 2018 SIP Update) and 84 FR 52005
(October 1, 2019) (final approval of the South Coast portion of the
2018 SIP Update).
\21\ Because we understand the State intended the RFP
demonstration for the Coachella Valley in the 2018 SIP Update to
replace the prior RFP demonstration in the 2016 AQMP submitted in
April 2017, we plan no further action on the RFP demonstration for
Coachella Valley in the 2016 AQMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2018 SIP Update also includes updated motor vehicle emissions
budgets and information to support the contingency measure element. To
supplement the contingency measures element of the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP, the District has committed by letter to modify an
existing rule or adopt a new rule to create a contingency measure that
will be triggered if the area fails to meet an RFP milestone or attain
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\22\ CARB transmitted the District's letter to the
EPA and committed to submit the revised District rule to the EPA as a
SIP revision within 12 months of the EPA's final action on the
contingency measure element of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne Nastri, SCAQMD
Executive Officer, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB.
\23\ Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Michael Benjamin,
Chief, Air Quality and Science Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer,
Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2953]]
B. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submission of
SIP Revisions
CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require a state to provide
reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submission of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet this
requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that adequate
public notice was given and an opportunity for a public hearing was
provided consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR
51.102.
Both the District and CARB have satisfied the applicable statutory
and regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of the SIP revisions that compose
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. With respect to the 2016 AQMP, the
District held six regional workshops from July 14 through July 21,
2016, and four regional hearings on November 15 and 17, 2016, to
discuss the plan and solicit public input.\24\ On December 19 and 20,
2016, the District published notices in several local newspapers of a
public hearing to be held on February 3, 2017, for the adoption of the
2016 AQMP.\25\ On February 3, 2017, the District held the public
hearing, and on March 3, 2017, through Resolution 17-2, the District
adopted the 2016 AQMP and directed the Executive Officer to forward the
plan to CARB for inclusion in the California SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See 2016 AQMP, Table 11-2.
\25\ Memorandum dated January 24, 2017, from Denise Garzaro,
Clerk of the Boards, SCAQMD to Arlene Martinez, Administrative
Secretary, Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources, SCAQMD. The
memorandum includes copies of the proofs of publication of the
notice for the February 3, 2017 public hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB also provided public notice and opportunity for public comment
on the 2016 AQMP. On March 6, 2017, CARB released for public review its
Staff Report for the 2016 AQMP and published a notice of public meeting
to be held on March 23, 2017, to consider adoption of the 2016
AQMP.\26\ On March 23, 2017, CARB held the hearing and adopted the 2016
AQMP as a revision to the California SIP, excluding those portions not
required to be submitted to the EPA, and directed the Executive Officer
to submit the 2016 AQMP to the EPA for approval into the California
SIP.\27\ On April 27, 2017, the Executive Officer of CARB submitted the
2016 AQMP to the EPA and included the transcript of the hearing held on
March 23, 2017.\28\ On October 23, 2017, the EPA determined that the
portions of this submittal applicable to the 2008 ozone NAAQS were
complete.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Adopting the 2016 Air
Quality Management Plan for Ozone and PM2.5 for the South
Coast Air Basin and the Coachella Valley signed by Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, March 6, 2017.
\27\ CARB Resolution 17-8, 10.
\28\ Transcript of the March 23, 2017 Meeting of the State of
California Air Resources Board.
\29\ Letter dated October 23, 2017, from Matthew J. Lakin,
Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX to Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the 2018 SIP Update, CARB also provided public
notice and opportunity for public comment. On September 21, 2018, CARB
released for public review the 2018 SIP Update and published notice of
a public meeting to be held on October 23, 2018, to consider adoption
of the 2018 SIP Update.\30\ On October 23, 2018, through Resolution 18-
50, CARB adopted the 2018 SIP Update. On December 5, 2018, CARB
submitted the 2018 SIP Update to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the 2018 Updates to
the California State Implementation Plan signed by Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, September 21, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on information provided in each of the SIP revisions
summarized above, the EPA has determined that all hearings were
properly noticed. Therefore, we find that the submittals of the 2016
AQMP and the 2018 SIP Update meet the procedural requirements for
public notice and hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR
51.102.
III. Review of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) require states to submit for
each ozone nonattainment area a ``base year inventory'' that is a
comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the area. In
addition, the 2008 Ozone SRR requires that the inventory year be
selected consistent with the baseline year for the RFP demonstration,
which is the most recent calendar year for which a complete triennial
inventory is required to be submitted to the EPA under the Air
Emissions Reporting Requirements.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 2008 Ozone SRR at 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and the Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements at 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has issued guidance on the development of base year and
future year emissions inventories for 8-hour ozone and other
pollutants.\32\ Emissions inventories for ozone must include emissions
of VOC and NOX and represent emissions for a typical ozone
season weekday.\33\ States should include documentation explaining how
the emissions data were calculated. In estimating mobile source
emissions, states should use the latest emissions models and planning
assumptions available at the time the SIP is developed.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA-454/B-17-002, May 2017.
At the time the 2016 AQMP was developed, the following EPA emissions
inventory guidance applied: ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' EPA-454-R-
05-001, November 2005.
\33\ 40 CFR 51.1115(a) and (c), and 40 CFR 51.1100(bb) and (cc).
\34\ 80 FR 12264, 12290 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future baseline emissions inventories must reflect the most recent
population, employment, travel and congestion estimates for the area.
In this context, ``baseline'' emissions inventories refer to emissions
estimates for a given year and area that reflect rules and regulations
and other measures that are already adopted. Future baseline emissions
inventories are necessary to show the projected effectiveness of SIP
control measures. Both the base year and future year inventories are
necessary for photochemical modeling to demonstrate attainment.
2. Summary of State's Submission
The 2016 AQMP includes a summary of the base year (2012) and future
year annual average baseline inventories for NOX and VOC for
the Coachella Valley. Documentation for the inventories is found in
Chapter 7 and Appendix III of the 2016 AQMP. Additionally, the District
provided the EPA with supplemental documentation (``2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement'') for the 2012 and 2026 ozone season inventories relied on
in the 2016 AQMP.\35\ The 2018 SIP Update provides detailed
NOX and VOC inventories for 2011 (the base year used for
RFP) and 2012, and projected inventories for 2017, 2020, 2023, 2026,
and 2027. Because ozone levels in the Coachella Valley are typically
higher from May through October, the
[[Page 2954]]
inventories in the 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement and the 2018 SIP
Update represent average summer day emissions. The inventories in the
2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement and 2018 SIP Update reflect District
rules adopted prior to December 2015 and CARB rules adopted by November
2015. For estimating on-road motor vehicle emissions, these inventories
use EMFAC2014, the EPA-approved version of California's mobile source
emissions model available at the time the 2016 AQMP and 2018 SIP Update
were developed.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Email dated June 28, 2019, from Zorik Pirveysian, SCAQMD,
to John Ungvarsky, EPA, Subject: ``RE: Coachella Valley ozone
inventory clarification and update on possible contingency
measures.'' The 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement consists of two
attachments to this email, which provide the detailed 2012 and 2026
ozone season inventories that were used for the summary in the 2016
AQMP. The inventories were generated on November 30, 2016.
\36\ EMFAC is short for EMission FACtor. The EPA announced the
availability of the EMFAC2014 model for use in state implementation
plan development and transportation conformity in California on
December 14, 2015. 80 FR 77337. The EPA's approval of the EMFAC2014
emissions model for SIP and conformity purposes was effective on the
date of publication of the notice in the Federal Register. On August
15, 2019, the EPA approved and announced the availability of
EMFAC2017, the latest update to the EMFAC model for use by State and
local governments to meet CAA requirements. See 84 FR 41717.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VOC and NOX emissions estimates are grouped into two
general categories, stationary sources and mobile sources. Stationary
sources are further divided into ``point'' and ``area'' sources. Point
sources typically refer to permitted facilities and have one or more
identified and fixed pieces of equipment and emissions points. Area
sources consist of widespread and numerous smaller emissions sources,
such as small permitted facilities and households. The mobile sources
category is divided into two major subcategories, ``on-road'' and
``off-road'' mobile sources. On-road mobile sources include light-duty
automobiles, light-, medium-, and heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles.
Off-road mobile sources include aircraft, locomotives, construction
equipment, mobile equipment, and recreational vehicles.
Point source emissions for the 2012 base year emissions inventory
are calculated using reported data from facilities using the District's
annual emissions reporting program, which applies under District Rule
301 (``Permitting and Associated Fees'') to stationary sources in the
Coachella Valley that emit 4 tons per year (tpy) or more of VOC or
NOX. Area sources include smaller emissions sources
distributed across the nonattainment area. CARB and the District
estimate emissions for about 400 area source categories using
established inventory methods, including publicly-available emissions
factors and activity information. Activity data are derived from
national survey data such as the Energy Information Administration or
from local sources such as the Southern California Gas Company, paint
suppliers, and District databases. Emissions factors used for the
estimates come from a number of sources including source tests,
compliance reports, and the EPA's compilation of emissions factor
document known as ``AP-42.''
On-road emissions inventories in the 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement
are calculated using CARB's EMFAC2014 model and the travel activity
data provided by SCAG in the 2016 RTP/SCS.\37\ CARB provided emissions
inventories for off-road equipment, including construction and mining
equipment, industrial and commercial equipment, lawn and garden
equipment, agricultural equipment, ocean-going vessels, commercial
harbor craft, locomotives, cargo handling equipment, pleasure craft,
and recreational vehicles. CARB uses several models to estimate
emissions for more than one hundred off-road equipment categories.\38\
Aircraft emissions inventories are developed in conjunction with the
airports in the region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See https://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. SCAG
is the metropolitan planning organization for the Coachella Valley
and surrounding areas. The SCAG region encompasses six counties
(Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and
Ventura) and 191 cities in an area covering more than 38,000 square
miles.
\38\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix III, page III-1-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 provides a summary of the District's 2012 base year and
2026 attainment year baseline emissions estimates in tons per average
summer day for NOX and VOC. These inventories provide the
basis for the control measure analysis and the attainment
demonstrations in the 2016 AQMP. Based on the inventory for 2012,
stationary and area sources currently account for 39 percent of the VOC
emissions and less than 5 percent of the NOX emissions in
the Coachella Valley while mobile sources account for 61 percent of the
VOC emissions and over 95 percent of the NOX emissions. For
a more detailed discussion of the methodologies used to develop the
inventories, see Appendix III of the 2016 AQMP.
Table 1--Coachella Valley Base Year and Attainment Year Baseline Emissions Inventories
[Summer planning inventory, tons per day (tpd)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 2026
Category ---------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC NOX VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources..................... 1.2 6.4 1.4 8.8
On-Road Mobile Sources.......................... 18.9 6.4 4.1 2.9
Off-Road Mobile Sources......................... 6.5 3.7 3.6 3.3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 26.6 16.5 9.1 15.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement and 2018 SIP Update, Table VII-1. The sum of the emissions values may
not equal the total due to rounding of the numbers.
Future emissions forecasts are primarily based on demographic and
economic growth projections provided by SCAG, and control factors
developed by the District in reference to the 2012 base year. Growth
factors used to project these baseline inventories are derived mainly
from data obtained from SCAG.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 2016 AQMP, 7-25, and Appendix III, page III-2-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
We have reviewed the 2012 base year emissions inventory in the 2016
AQMP Inventory Supplement and the inventory methodologies used by the
District and CARB for consistency with CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. First, we find that the 2012 inventory includes estimates for
VOC and NOX for a typical ozone season weekday, and that
CARB has provided adequate documentation explaining how the emissions
are calculated. Second, we find that the 2012 base year emissions
inventory in the 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement reflects appropriate
[[Page 2955]]
emissions models and methodologies, and, therefore, represents a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions
during that year in the Coachella Valley nonattainment area. Third, we
find that selection of year 2012 for the base year emissions inventory
is appropriate because it is consistent with the 2011 RFP baseline year
(from the 2018 SIP Update) because both inventories are derived from a
common set of models and methods. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
approve the 2012 emissions inventory in the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement as meeting the requirements for a base year inventory set
forth in CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1115.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ The 2012 base year inventory from the 2016 AQMP Inventory
Supplement revises and updates the base year emission inventory
included in the ``8-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Emission
Inventory Submittal'' submitted by CARB on July 17, 2014. Because we
understand the State intended the 2016 AQMP and the 2016 AQMP
Inventory Supplement to replace the July 2014 submittal (at least
with respect to Coachella Valley), we plan no further action on the
inventory for Coachella Valley submitted by CARB in July 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the 2026 attainment year baseline projections, we
have reviewed the growth and control factors and find them acceptable
and conclude that the future baseline emissions projections in the 2016
AQMP Inventory Supplement reflect appropriate calculation methods and
the latest planning assumptions. Also, as a general matter, the EPA
will approve a SIP revision that takes emissions reduction credit for a
control measure only where the EPA has approved the measure as part of
the SIP. Thus, to take credit for the emissions reductions from newly-
adopted or amended District rules for stationary sources, the related
rules must be approved by the EPA into the SIP. Table 2 in the
technical support document (TSD) accompanying this rulemaking shows
District rules with post-2012 compliance dates that were incorporated
in the future year inventories, along with information on EPA approval
of these rules, and shows that emissions reductions assumed by the 2016
AQMP for future years for stationary sources are supported by rules
approved as part of the SIP. With respect to mobile sources, the EPA
has taken action in recent years to approve CARB mobile source
regulations into the California SIP.\41\ We therefore find that the
future year baseline projections in the 2016 AQMP Inventory Supplement
are properly supported by SIP-approved stationary and mobile source
measures.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82 FR 14446 (March 21,
2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May 18, 2018).
\42\ The baseline emissions projections in the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP assume implementation of CARB's Zero Emissions Vehicle
(ZEV) sales mandate and greenhouse gas (GHG) standards. On September
27, 2019, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the EPA issued a
notice of final rulemaking for the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
(SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program that, among
other things, withdrew the EPA's 2013 waiver of preemption of CARB's
ZEV sales mandate and GHG standards. 84 FR 51310. See also proposed
SAFE rule at 83 FR 42986 (August 24, 2018). However, the agencies'
final rule withdrawing the 2013 waiver did not include final action
on the federal fuel economy and GHG vehicle emissions standards from
the SAFE proposal. If the fuel economy and GHG standards are
finalized prior to our final rulemaking on the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP, we will evaluate and address, as appropriate, the impact
of the SAFE action on our proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Emissions Statement
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act requires states to submit a SIP
revision requiring owners or operators of stationary sources of VOC or
NOX to provide the state with statements of actual emissions
from such sources. Statements must be submitted at least every year and
must contain a certification that the information contained in the
statement is accurate to the best knowledge of the individual
certifying the statement. Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act allows
states to waive the emissions statement requirement for any class or
category of stationary sources that emit less than 25 tpy of VOC or
NOX, if the state provides an inventory of emissions from
such class or category of sources as part of the base year or periodic
inventories required under CAA sections 182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3)(A),
based on the use of emissions factors established by the EPA or other
methods acceptable to the EPA.
The preamble of the 2008 Ozone SRR states that if an area has a
previously approved emissions statement rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
or the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that covers all portions of the nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, such rule should be sufficient for
purposes of the emissions statement requirement for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. The state should review the existing rule to ensure it is
adequate and, if so, may rely on it to meet the emissions statement
requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\43\ Where an existing emissions
statement requirement is still adequate to meet the requirements of
this rule, states can provide the rationale for that determination to
the EPA in a written statement in the SIP to meet this requirement.
States should identify the various requirements and how each is met by
the existing emissions statement program. Where an emissions statement
requirement is modified for any reason, states must provide the
revision to the emissions statement as part of its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See 80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The 2016 AQMP addresses compliance with the emissions statement
requirement in CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS by
reference to District Rule 301 that, among other things, requires
emissions reporting from all stationary sources of NOX and
VOC greater than or equal to 4 tpy. District Rule 301 applies
throughout both the South Coast and the Coachella Valley. On July 12,
2019, the District adopted revisions to District Rule 301 to meet the
requirements in CAA section 182(a)(3)(B), and on July 19, 2019, the
District submitted to CARB a request for Rule 301 to be included into
the California SIP and forwarded to the EPA. On August 5, 2019, CARB
adopted and submitted paragraphs (e)(1)(A) and (B), (e)(2), (e)(5) and
(e)(8) of District Rule 301 to the EPA as a revision to the California
SIP. The submittal includes CARB Executive Order S-19-011 adopting the
specified sections of District Rule 301 as a revision to the SIP, a
copy of District Rule 301 itself, and documentation of public notice
and opportunity to comment on the draft rule.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
On October 1, 2019, as part of our approval of the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP, the EPA approved portions of District Rule 301 (paragraphs
(e)(1)(A) and (B), (e)(2), (e)(5) and (e)(8)) as meeting the emissions
statement requirement under CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the South
Coast for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\44\ Rule 301 is effective throughout
both the South Coast and the Coachella Valley. Therefore, the approved
portions of District Rule 301 also satisfy the CAA 182(a)(3)(B)
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 84 FR 52005, 52015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and Control
Strategy
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provide
for the implementation of all RACM as
[[Page 2956]]
expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions
from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through
implementation of reasonably available control technology (RACT)), and
also provide for attainment of the NAAQS. The 2008 Ozone SRR requires
that, for each nonattainment area required to submit an attainment
demonstration, the state concurrently submit a SIP revision
demonstrating that it has adopted all RACM necessary to demonstrate
attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP
requirements.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 40 CFR 51.1112(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the General Preamble for the Implementation of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990 (``General Preamble'') and in a memorandum
entitled ``Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measure
Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone
Nonattainment Areas.'' \46\ In short, to address the requirement to
adopt all RACM, states should consider all potentially reasonable
control measures for source categories in the nonattainment area to
determine whether they are reasonably available for implementation in
that area and whether they would, if implemented individually or
collectively, advance the area's attainment date by one year or
more.\47\ Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements
that are not already either federally promulgated, or part of the
state's SIP, must be submitted in enforceable form as part of the
state's attainment plan for the area.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 1992)
and memorandum dated November 30, 1999, from John Seitz, Director,
OAQPS, to Regional Air Directors, titled ``Guidance on the
Reasonably Available Control Measure Requirement and Attainment
Demonstration Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas.''
\47\ Id. See also 44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979), and memorandum
dated December 14, 2000, from John S. Seitz, Director, OAQPS, to
Regional Air Directors, titled ``Additional Submission on RACM From
States with Severe One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs.''
\48\ For ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or
above, CAA section 182(b)(2) also requires implementation of RACT
for all major sources of VOC and for each VOC source category for
which the EPA has issued a control techniques guideline. CAA section
182(f) requires that RACT under section 182(b)(2) also apply to
major stationary sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major
source is a stationary source that emits or has the potential to
emit at least 25 tpy of VOC or NOX (see CAA section
182(e) and (f)). Under the 2008 Ozone SRR, states were required to
submit SIP revisions meeting the RACT requirements of CAA sections
182(b)(2) and 182(f) no later than 24 months after the effective
date of designation for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS and to implement the
required RACT measures as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than January 1 of the 5th year after the effective date of
designation (see 40 CFR 51.1112(a)). California submitted the CAA
section 182 RACT SIP for the South Coast and the Coachella Valley on
July 18, 2014, and the EPA fully approved this submission at 82 FR
43850 (September 20, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
For the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP, the District, CARB, and
SCAG each undertook a process to identify and evaluate potential RACM
that could contribute to expeditious attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
in the Coachella Valley. The RACM demonstration for the Coachella
Valley is the same demonstration undertaken for the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP that the EPA approved on November 1, 2019.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ 84 FR 52005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. District's RACM Analysis
The District's RACM demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS focuses
on stationary and area source controls, and it is described in Appendix
VI-A (``Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Best Available
Control Measures (BACM) Demonstration'') of the 2016 AQMP. Appendix VI-
A identifies potential control measures and analyzes these measures for
emission reduction opportunities, as well as economic and technological
feasibility. The District's comprehensive demonstration considers
potential control measures for stationary and area sources located
throughout the areas under its jurisdiction, including both the South
Coast (where most of the sources are located) and the Coachella Valley.
Therefore, the demonstration includes not only all of the source
categories present in the Coachella Valley, but also the source
categories found only in the South Coast.
As a first step in the RACM analysis, the District prepared a
detailed inventory of emissions sources that emit VOC and
NOX to identify source categories from which emissions
reductions would effectively contribute to attainment. Details on the
methodology and development of the emissions inventory are discussed in
Chapter 7 and Appendix III of the 2016 AQMP. A total of 76 source
categories are included in the base year emissions inventory: 46 for
stationary and area sources and 30 for mobile sources.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI-A, Table VI-A-3. The majority of the
stationary emissions sources included in this inventory are located
in the South Coast. The 2016 AQMP identifies only two stationary
sources (i.e., Desert View Power and Imperial Irrigation District)
emitting 10 tpy or more of either VOC or NOX in 2012
located within the Coachella Valley. See 2016 AQMP, Appendix III,
Attachment C. CARB's Facility Search Engine database shows three
sources (i.e., Desert View Power, Palm Springs International
Airport, and Sentinel Energy Center LLC) emitting 10 tpy or more of
either VOC or NOX emissions in 2017 located in the
Coachella Valley. See the docket for today's action or go to CARB's
database at https://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php
and set Air Basin search filter to ``Salton Sea.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the RACM analysis, the District then compared these source
categories to its rules for stationary and area sources. This analysis
builds upon a foundation of District rules developed for earlier ozone
plans and approved as part of the SIP. We provide a list of the
District's NOX and VOC rules approved into the California
SIP in Table 1 of our TSD for this proposed action. The 86 SIP-approved
District VOC or NOX rules listed in Table 1 of our TSD
establish emissions limits or other types of emissions controls for a
wide range of sources, including use of solvents, refineries, gasoline
storage, architectural coatings, spray booths, various types of
commercial coatings, boilers, steam generators and process heaters, oil
and gas production well, marine tank vessel operations, and many more.
These rules have already provided significant reductions toward
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026.
To demonstrate that the SCAQMD considered all candidate measures
that are available and technologically and economically feasible, the
District conducted a six-step analysis, as described below.
Step 1. 2015 Air Quality Technology Symposium (``2015 Symposium'')
The 2015 Symposium was held on June 10 and 11, 2015, with
participation of technical experts and the public to solicit new and
innovative concepts to assist in attaining the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS by the applicable attainment dates. The SCAQMD also conducted
extensive outreach to engage a wide range of stakeholders in the
process.
Step 2. Reasonably Available Control Technology/Best Available Control
Technology Analysis
The District's Reasonably Available Control Technology/Best
Available Control Technology (RACT/BACT) analysis \51\ found four
SCAQMD VOC or NOX rules (i.e., District Rules 462 (``Organic
Liquid Loading''), 1115 (``Motor Vehicle Assembly Line Coating
Operations''), 1118 (``Control of Emissions from Refinery Flares'') and
1138 (``Control of Emissions from
[[Page 2957]]
Restaurant Operations'')) that are less stringent than EPA control
techniques guidelines or analogous rules in other air districts. The
SCAQMD evaluated the rules as candidate potential measures. See section
IV of the TSD for this action for the EPA's evaluation of the four
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ BACM, including BACT, is a requirement for certain
PM2.5 nonattainment areas. BACM is not a requirement for
ozone nonattainment areas, but because the District addresses both
PM2.5 and ozone in its 2016 AQMP, the District prepared
an analysis that addresses both RACT and BACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 3. EPA TSDs
The District researched TSDs from recent EPA rulemakings on SCAQMD
rules for EPA recommendations on potential control measures. The TSD
for the EPA's action on District Rule 1125 (``Metal Container, Closure,
and Coil Coating Operations,'' amended March 7, 2008) was the only
applicable and recent TSD that met the criteria for review.
Step 4. Control Measures in Other Areas
The District reviewed control measures in other areas (i.e.,
Ventura County, San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento
Metropolitan, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, New
York, and New Jersey) to evaluate whether control technologies
available and cost-effective within other areas would be available and
cost-effective for use in the South Coast and the Coachella Valley.
Step 5. Control Measures beyond RACM in 2012 AQMP
The District updated the RACM analysis for four control measures
that were determined to be beyond RACM in the analysis for the prior
2012 AQMP, including reconsideration of emissions reductions of VOC
from greenwaste composting.
Step 6. EPA Menu of Control Measures
The Menu of Control Measures (MCM) \52\ compiled by the EPA's
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards was created to provide
information useful in the development of emissions reduction strategies
and to identify and evaluate potential control measures. District staff
reviewed the MCM for point and nonpoint sources of NOX and
VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ EPA, MCM, https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pdfs/MenuOfControlMeasures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District provides a comprehensive evaluation of its RACM
control strategy in Appendix VI-A of the 2016 AQMP. The evaluation
includes the following: Source descriptions; base year and projected
baseline year emissions for the source category affected by the rule;
discussion of the current requirements of the rule; and discussion of
potential additional control measures, including, in many cases, a
discussion of the technological and economic feasibility of the
additional control measures. This includes comparison of each District
rule to analogous control measures adopted by other agencies.
Based on its RACM analysis for stationary and area sources under
its jurisdiction, the District identified the following three
additional RACM with quantifiable VOC and NOX emission
reductions: CMB-02--Emission Reductions from Replacement with Zero or
Near-Zero NOX Appliances in Commercial and Residential
Applications; CMB-03--Emission Reductions from Non-Refinery Flares; and
BCM-10--Emission Reductions from Greenwaste Composting. These three
RACM are included in the District's stationary source measures in Table
4-2 of the 2016 AQMP that the District Board adopted through Resolution
17-2. For the few remaining measures that the District rejected from
its RACM analysis, the District determined that these measures would
not collectively advance the attainment date or contribute to RFP due
to the uncertain or non-quantifiable emissions reductions they would
potentially generate.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI-A, page VI-A-40, and Attachments VI-
A-1c, VI-A-1d, and VI-A-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on its evaluation of all available measures, the District
concluded that its existing rules are generally as stringent as, or
more stringent than, the analogous rules in other districts. Further,
the District concluded that, based on its comprehensive review and
evaluation of potential candidate measures and the adoption of
commitments to implement the three measures determined to be
technologically and economically feasible, the District meets the RACM
requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for all sources under the
District's jurisdiction.
Lastly, the District concluded that its controls will achieve
attainment for the ozone standards as expeditiously as possible, and
that the available control measures not included as plan commitments
would not collectively advance attainment.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI-A-40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Local Jurisdictions' RACM Analysis and Transportation Control
Measures
Appendix IV-C of the 2016 AQMP, contains the transportation control
measure (TCM) RACM component for the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. The
TCMs in Appendix IV-C are applicable in the upwind South Coast Air
Basin. Because of the significant influence of pollutant transport from
the South Coast Air Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella Valley,
neither the District nor CARB rely on implementation of any TCMs in the
Coachella Valley to demonstrate implementation of RACM in the 2016
Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. SCAG conducted the TCM RACM analysis on
behalf of the local jurisdictions in its region, based on its 2016 RTP/
SCS and 2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), as
amended.\55\ The 2016 RTP/SCS and FTIP were developed in consultation
with federal, state and local transportation and air quality planning
agencies and other stakeholders. The four county transportation
commissions (CTCs),\56\ including the Riverside CTC overseeing the
Coachella Valley, were involved in the development of the regional
transportation measures in Appendix IV-C.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ The 2016 RTP/SCS was adopted by SCAG's Regional Council on
April 7, 2016. The 2015 FTIP was adopted by SCAG's Executive/
Administration Committee on September 11, 2014, and approved by the
Federal Highway Administration on December 14, 2014.
\56\ Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,
Riverside County Transportation Commission, Orange County
Transportation Authority, and the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (formerly known as the San Bernardino
Associated Governments).
\57\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix IV-C, page IV-C-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in Appendix IV-C of the 2016 AQMP, for the TCM RACM
analysis, SCAG compared the list of measures implemented within the
South Coast with those implemented in other ozone and PM2.5
nonattainment areas.\58\ SCAG then organized measures, including
candidate measures and those measures currently implemented in the
region, according to the sixteen categories specified in section
108(f)(1)(A) of the CAA. SCAG found a small number of candidate
measures that were not currently implemented in the region and not
included in the prior 2012 AQMP TCM RACM analysis. Attachment A
(``Committed Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)'') to Appendix IV-C
of the 2016 AQMP lists the TCM projects that are specifically
identified and committed to in the 2016 AQMP. The complete listing of
all candidate measures evaluated for the RACM determination is included
in Attachment B (``2016 South Coast AQMP Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) Analysis--TCMs'') to Appendix IV-C of the 2016 AQMP.
Based on its comprehensive review of TCM projects in other
nonattainment
[[Page 2958]]
areas or otherwise identified, SCAG determined that the TCMs being
implemented in the South Coast are inclusive of all RACM.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ The specific nonattainment area SIPs that were reviewed for
candidate TCMs for ozone are listed in Table 4 of Appendix IV-C of
the 2016 AQMP.
\59\ Appendix IV-C, page IV-C-30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. CARB's RACM Analysis
CARB's RACM analysis is contained in Attachment VI-A-3
(``California Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control
Measures/Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment'') (``BACM/
RACM assessment'') to Appendix VI-A of the 2016 AQMP.
CARB's BACM/RACM assessment provides a general description of
CARB's existing mobile source programs. A more detailed description of
CARB's mobile source control program, including a comprehensive table
listing on- and off-road mobile source regulatory actions taken by CARB
since 1985, is contained in Attachment VI-C-1 to Appendix VI-C of the
2016 AQMP. The BACM/RACM assessment and 2016 State Strategy
collectively contain CARB's evaluation of mobile source and other
statewide control measures that reduce emissions of NOX and
VOC in California, including the Coachella Valley. The 2016 State
Strategy also includes a commitment to take action on new measures and
to achieve aggregate emissions reductions in the South Coast.\60\
Because the Coachella Valley's attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS is
dependent on progress made in the upwind South Coast, this commitment
will contribute to attainment in the Coachella Valley. On October 1,
2019, the EPA approved the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP, including CARB's
commitment.\61\ For additional details on CARB's commitment, see
section III.D.2.b.ii of our notice for the proposed action.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ 2016 State Strategy, Chapter 3 (``Proposed SIP
Commitment''),
\61\ 84 FR 52005, 52015.
\62\ 84 FR 28132, 28147.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source categories for which CARB has primary responsibility for
reducing emissions in California include most new and existing on- and
off-road engines and vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer
products. CARB developed its 2016 State Strategy through a multi-step
measure development process, including extensive public consultation,
to develop and evaluate potential strategies for mobile source
categories under CARB's regulatory authority that could contribute to
expeditious attainment of the standard.\63\ Through the process of
developing the 2016 State Strategy, CARB identified certain defined
measures as available to achieve additional VOC and NOX
emissions reductions from sources under CARB jurisdiction, including
tighter requirements for new light- and medium-duty vehicles (referred
to as the ``Advanced Clean Cars 2'' measure), a low-NOX
engine standard for vehicles with new heavy-duty engines, tighter
emissions standards for small off-road engines, and more stringent
requirements for consumer products, among others.\64\ In adopting the
2016 State Strategy, CARB commits to bringing the defined measures to
the CARB Board for action according to the specific schedule included
as part of the strategy.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ Appendix VI-A, Attachment VI-A-3, page VI-A-102.
\64\ 2016 State Strategy, Chapter 4 (``State SIP Measures'').
\65\ CARB Resolution 17-7 (dated March 23, 2017), 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the need for substantial emissions reductions from mobile and
area sources to meet the NAAQS in California nonattainment areas, CARB
established stringent control measures for on-road and off-road mobile
sources and the fuels that power them. California has unique authority
under CAA section 209 (subject to a waiver by the EPA) to adopt and
implement new emission standards for many categories of on-road
vehicles and engines, and new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines.
CARB's mobile source program extends beyond regulations that are
subject to the waiver or authorization process set forth in CAA section
209 to include standards and other requirements to control emissions
from in-use heavy-duty trucks and buses, gasoline and diesel fuel
specifications, and many other types of mobile sources. Generally,
these regulations have been submitted and approved as revisions to the
California SIP.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ See, e.g., the EPA's approval of standards and other
requirements to control emissions from in-use heavy-duty diesel-
powered trucks, at 77 FR 20308 (April 4, 2012), revisions to the
California on-road reformulated gasoline and diesel fuel regulations
at 75 FR 26653 (May 12, 2010), and revisions to the California motor
vehicle inspection and maintenance program at 75 FR 38023 (July 1,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the BACM/RACM assessment, CARB concludes that, in light of the
extensive public process culminating in the 2016 State Strategy, with
the current mobile source program and proposed measures included in the
2016 State Strategy, there are no additional RACM that would advance
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the South Coast. As a result,
CARB concludes that California's mobile source programs fully meet the
RACM requirement.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI-A-106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix IV-B of the 2016 AQMP describes CARB's current consumer
products program and commitments in the 2016 State Strategy to achieve
additional VOC reductions from consumer products.\68\ As described in
this section, CARB's current consumer products program limits VOC
emissions from 129 consumer product categories, including product
categories such as antiperspirants and deodorants and aerosol
coatings.\69\ The EPA has approved many of these measures into the
California SIP as VOC emissions controls for a wide array of consumer
products.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix IV-B, page IV-B-93. CARB's consumer
product measures are found in the California Code of Regulations,
Title 17 (``Public Health''), Division 3 (``Air Resources''),
Chapter 1 (``Air Resources Board''), Subchapter 8.5 (``Consumer
Products'').
\69\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix IV-B, page IV-B-93.
\70\ The compilation of such measures that have been approved
into the California SIP, including Federal Register citations, is
available at: https://www.epa.gov/sips-ca/epa-approved-regulations-california-sip. EPA's most recent approval of amendments to
California's consumer products regulations was in 2014. 79 FR 62346
(October 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
As described above, the District already implements many rules to
reduce VOC and NOX emissions from stationary and area
sources in the Coachella Valley. For the 2016 AQMP, the District
evaluated a range of potentially available measures and committed to
adopt certain additional measures (i.e., CMB-02, CMB-03, and BCM-10)
found to be reasonably available for implementation in the South Coast
and Coachella Valley nonattainment areas. We find that the process
followed by the District in the 2016 AQMP to identify additional RACM
is generally consistent with the EPA's recommendations in the General
Preamble, that the District's evaluation of potential measures is
appropriate, and that the District has provided reasoned justifications
for rejection of measures deemed not reasonably available.
With respect to mobile sources, CARB's current program addresses
the full range of mobile sources in the South Coast and Coachella
Valley through regulatory programs for both new and in-use vehicles.
Moreover, we find that the process conducted by CARB to prepare the
2016 State Strategy was reasonably designed to identify additional
available measures within CARB's jurisdiction, and that CARB has
[[Page 2959]]
adopted those measures that are reasonably available (e.g., the low-
NOX heavy-duty engine standard, among others). With respect
to TCMs, we find that SCAG's process for identifying additional TCM
RACM and conclusion that the TCMs being implemented in the South Coast
(i.e., the TCMs listed in Attachment A to Appendix IV-C of the 2016
AQMP) are inclusive of all TCM RACM to be reasonably justified and
supported. For the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP, given the
significant influence of pollutant transport from the South Coast Air
Basin and the minimal and diminishing emissions benefits generally
associated with TCMs, no TCM or combination of TCMs implemented in the
Coachella Valley would advance the attainment date in the Coachella
Valley. Therefore, no TCMs are reasonably available for implementation
in the Coachella Valley for the purposes of meeting the RACM
requirement.
Additionally, we find that CARB's consumer products program
comprehensively addresses emissions from consumer products in the South
Coast and Coachella Valley. CARB measures are more stringent than the
EPA's consumer products regulation promulgated in 1998,\71\ and
generally exceed the controls in place throughout other areas of the
country. The additional commitments included in the 2016 State Strategy
will further strengthen this program by achieving additional VOC
reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ 63 FR 48819 (September 11, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of these RACM analyses, the District's and
CARB's adopted rules, and the District's commitment to adopt three
additional reasonably available measures (i.e., CMB-02, CMB-03, and
BCM-10), we propose to find that there are currently no additional RACM
(including RACT) that would advance attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
in the Coachella Valley, and that the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
provides for the implementation of all RACM as required by CAA section
172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1112(c). For additional background on the EPA's
evaluation of the District's RACM analysis, see our June 17, 2019
notice of proposed rulemaking on the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ 84 FR 28132, 28140. See also the EPA's November 1, 2019
approval of the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP at 84 FR 52005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Attainment Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
An attainment demonstration consists of: (1) Technical analyses,
such as base year and future year modeling, to locate and identify
sources of emissions that are contributing to violations of the ozone
NAAQS within the nonattainment area (i.e., analyses related to the
emissions inventory for the nonattainment area and the emissions
reductions necessary to attain the standards); (2) a list of adopted
measures (including RACT controls) with schedules for implementation
and other means and techniques necessary and appropriate for
demonstrating RFP and attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than the outside attainment date for the area's classification;
(3) a RACM analysis; and (4) contingency measures required under
sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the CAA that can be implemented
without further action by the state or the EPA to cover emissions
shortfalls in RFP and failures to attain.\73\ This subsection of
today's proposed rule addresses the first two components of the
attainment demonstration--the technical analyses and a list of adopted
measures. Section III.C (Reasonably Available Control Measures
Demonstration and Control Strategy) of this document addresses the RACM
component, and section III.G (Contingency Measures) addresses the
contingency measures component of the attainment demonstration in the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ 78 FR 34178, 34184 (June 6, 2013) (proposed rule for
implementing the 2008 ozone NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the technical analyses, section 182(c)(2)(A) of the
CAA requires that a plan for an ozone nonattainment area classified
Serious or above include a ``demonstration that the plan . . . will
provide for attainment of the ozone [NAAQS] by the applicable
attainment date. This attainment demonstration must be based on
photochemical grid modeling or any other analytical method determined .
. . to be at least as effective.'' The attainment demonstration
predicts future ambient concentrations for comparison to the NAAQS,
making use of available information on measured concentrations,
meteorology, and current and projected emissions inventories of ozone
precursors, including the effect of control measures in the plan.
Areas classified Severe for the 2008 ozone NAAQS must demonstrate
attainment as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 15 years
after the effective date of designation to nonattainment. The Coachella
Valley was designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS effective
July 20, 2012,\74\ and accordingly the area must demonstrate attainment
of the standards by July 20, 2027.\75\ An attainment demonstration must
show attainment of the standards by the calendar year prior to the
attainment date, so in practice, Severe nonattainment areas must
demonstrate attainment in 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ 77 FR 30087 (May 21, 2012).
\75\ 80 FR 12264.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's recommended procedures for modeling ozone as part of an
attainment demonstration are contained in ``Modeling Guidance for
Demonstrating Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and
Regional Haze'' (``Modeling Guidance'').\76\ The Modeling Guidance
includes recommendations for a modeling protocol, model input
preparation, model performance evaluation, use of model output for the
numerical NAAQS attainment test, and modeling documentation. Air
quality modeling is performed using meteorology and emissions from a
base year, and the predicted concentrations from this base case
modeling are compared to air quality monitoring data from that year to
evaluate model performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ Modeling Guidance, EPA 454/R-18-009, November 2018. See
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/O3-PM-RH-Modeling_Guidance-2018.pdf. The Modeling Guidance updates, but is
largely consistent with, the earlier ``Guidance on the Use of Models
and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals
for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and Regional Haze,''
EPA-454/B-07-002, April 2007. Additional EPA modeling guidance can
be found in 40 CFR 51 Appendix W, ``Guideline on Air Quality
Models,'' 82 FR 5182 (January 17, 2017); available at https://www.epa.gov/scram/clean-air-act-permit-modeling-guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the model performance is determined to be acceptable, future
year emissions are simulated with the model. The relative (or percent)
change in modeled concentration due to future emissions reductions
provides a relative response factor (RRF). Each monitoring site's RRF
is applied to its monitored base year design value to provide the
future design value for comparison to the NAAQS. The Modeling Guidance
also recommends supplemental air quality analyses, which may be used as
part of a weight of evidence (WOE) analysis. A WOE analysis
corroborates the attainment demonstration by considering evidence other
than the main air quality modeling attainment test, such as trends and
additional monitoring and modeling analyses.
The Modeling Guidance also does not require a particular year to be
used as the base year for 8-hour ozone plans.\77\ The Modeling Guidance
states that the most recent year of the National Emissions Inventory
may be appropriate
[[Page 2960]]
for use as the base year for modeling, but that other years may be more
appropriate when considering meteorology, transport patterns,
exceptional events, or other factors that may vary from year to
year.\78\ Therefore, the base year used for the attainment
demonstration need not be the same year used to meet the requirements
for emissions inventories and RFP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Modeling Guidance at section 2.7.1, 35.
\78\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the list of adopted measures, CAA section 172(c)(6)
requires that nonattainment area plans include enforceable emissions
limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and
auctions of emission rights), as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for timely
attainment of the NAAQS.\79\ Under the 2008 Ozone SRR, all control
measures needed for attainment must be implemented no later than the
beginning of the attainment year ozone season.\80\ The attainment year
ozone season is defined as the ozone season immediately preceding a
nonattainment area's maximum attainment date.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
\80\ 40 CFR 51.1108(d).
\81\ 40 CFR 51.1100(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
The 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP includes photochemical modeling
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The SCAQMD performed the air quality modeling
for the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. The modeling relies on a 2012
base year and demonstrates attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2026.
As a general matter, the modeling for the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP represents an update to the photochemical modeling performed
for the EPA-approved 2012 AQMP to account for more recent satellite-
based input data, improved chemical gaseous and particulate mechanisms,
improved computational resources and post-processing utilities,
enhanced spatial and temporal allocations of the emissions inventory,
and a revised attainment demonstration methodology. The modeling and
modeled attainment demonstration are described in Chapter 5 (``Future
Air Quality'') of the 2016 AQMP. Chapter 7 (``Current and Future Air
Quality: Desert Nonattainment Areas SIP'') provides background
information on the Coachella Valley, as well as the ozone attainment
demonstration. Appendix V (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration'')
of the 2016 AQMP provides a description of model input preparation
procedures, various model configuration options, and model performance
statistics. The modeling protocol is in Chapter 2 (``Modeling
Protocol'') of Appendix V of the 2016 AQMP and contains all the
elements recommended in the Modeling Guidance. Those include: Selection
of model, time period to model, modeling domain, and model boundary
conditions and initialization procedures; a discussion of emissions
inventory development and other model input preparation procedures;
model performance evaluation procedures; selection of days; and other
details for calculating RRFs. Appendix V of the 2016 AQMP provides the
coordinates of the modeling domain and thoroughly describes the
development of the modeling emissions inventory, including its chemical
speciation, its spatial and temporal allocation, its temperature
dependence, and quality assurance procedures. Appendix C of CARB's
Staff Report for the 2016 AQMP, entitled ``Coachella Valley Weight of
Evidence,'' provides additional information about ozone formation and
trends in the Coachella Valley.
The modeling analysis used version 5.0.2 of the Community
Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) photochemical model, developed by the
EPA. To prepare meteorological input for CMAQ, the Weather and Research
Forecasting model version 3.6 (WRF) from the National Center for
Atmospheric Research was used. CMAQ and WRF are both recognized in the
Modeling Guidance as technically sound, state-of-the-art models. The
areal extent and the horizontal and vertical resolution used in these
models were adequate for modeling Coachella Valley ozone.
The WRF meteorological model results and performance statistics are
described in Chapter 3 (``Meteorological Modeling and Sensitivity
Analyses'') of Appendix V. The District evaluated the performance of
the WRF model through a series of simulations and concluded that the
daily WRF simulation for 2012 provided representative meteorological
fields that well characterized the observed conditions. The District's
conclusions were supported by hourly time series graphs of wind speed,
direction, and temperature for the southern California domain, included
as Attachment 1 (``WRF Model Performance Time Series'') to Appendix V.
Ozone model performance statistics are described in the 2016 AQMP
Appendix V, Chapter 5 (``8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration'') which
include tables of statistics recommended in the Modeling Guidance for
ozone for the South Coast sub-regions, including the Coachella
Valley.\82\ Hourly time series are presented as well as density scatter
plots, and plots of bias against concentration. Note that, because only
relative changes are used from the modeling, the underprediction of
ozone concentrations does not mean that future concentrations will be
underestimated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ The other sub-regions are the ``Coastal,'' ``San
Fernando,'' ``Foothills,'' ``Urban Source,'' and ``Urban Receptor''
zones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After model performance for the 2012 base case was accepted, the
model was applied to develop RRFs for the attainment demonstration.
This entailed running the model with the same meteorological inputs as
before, but with adjusted emissions inventories to reflect the expected
changes between 2012 and the 2026 attainment year. The base year or
``reference year'' modeling inventory was the same as the inventory for
the modeling base case. The 2026 inventory projects the base year into
the future by including the effect of economic growth and emissions
control measures. The set of 153 days from May 1 through September 30,
2012, was simulated and analyzed to determine 8-hour average maximum
ozone concentrations for the 2012 and 2026 emissions inventories. To
develop the RRFs for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, only the top 10 days were
used, consistent with the Modeling Guidance.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ See Modeling Guidance at section 4.2.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Modeling Guidance addresses attainment demonstrations with
ozone NAAQS based on 8-hour averages, and for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the
2016 AQMP carried out the attainment test procedure consistent with the
Modeling Guidance. The RRFs were calculated as the ratio of future to
base year concentrations. The resulting RRFs were then applied to 2012
weighted base year design values \84\ for each monitor to arrive at
2026 future year design values. Ozone is measured continuously at two
locations in the Coachella Valley at the Palm Springs and Indio air
monitoring stations. The modeled 2026 ozone design value at the Palm
Springs site (the higher of the two sites) is 0.075 ppm; this value
demonstrates attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ The Modeling Guidance recommends that RRFs be applied to
the average of three three-year design values centered on the base
year, in this case the design values for 2010-2012, 2011-2013, and
2012-2014. This amounts to a 5-year weighted average of individual
year 4th high concentrations, centered on the base year of 2012, and
so is referred to as a weighted design value.
\85\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix V, page V-5-28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2961]]
The 2016 AQMP modeling includes a WOE demonstration, based on a
model performance evaluation of the temporal profile of on-road mobile
source emissions and spatial surrogate profiles of area emissions.\86\
The demonstration is based on a sensitivity analysis of four scenarios
of emissions reductions. Appendix C of CARB's Staff Report for the 2016
AQMP also provides a WOE discussion that includes information about
ozone formation in the Coachella Valley. The WOE demonstration in
Appendix C includes ambient ozone data and trends, precursor emissions
trends and reductions, and population exposure trends to complement the
regional photochemical modeling analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix V, pages V-5-36 to V-5-41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Control Strategy for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
The control strategy for attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley relies primarily on timely attainment in 2023 of the
1997 ozone NAAQS in the South Coast. Continued air quality improvement
in the Coachella Valley is expected during the 2023 through 2026
timeframe because of ongoing fleet turnover in the Coachella Valley and
South Coast and from existing measures and additional reductions from
new measures implemented before 2027 for attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by 2031 in the South Coast.
The control strategy in the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP for
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS by 2023 in the South Coast relies on
emissions reductions from already-adopted measures, commitments by the
District to certain regulatory and nonregulatory initiatives and
aggregate emissions reductions, and commitments by CARB to certain
regulatory and nonregulatory initiatives and aggregate emissions
reductions. Already-adopted measures are expected to achieve
approximately 66 percent of the NOX reductions needed from
the 2012 base year for the South Coast to attain the NAAQS in 2023. To
address the remaining emissions reductions, the 2016 South Coast Ozone
SIP includes District and CARB aggregate commitments to achieve
additional emissions reductions by 2023, as shown in tables 2, 3, and 4
below. Table 2 summarizes the additional reduction commitments in the
2016 South Coast Ozone SIP. Tables 3 and 4 show the District and CARB
measures included in the aggregate commitments in Table 2. The
emissions reductions for individual measures shown in tables 3 and 4
are not intended to be enforceable; they are estimates prepared by the
District and CARB to show how they expect at the present time to
achieve the aggregate emissions reductions for 2023. The EPA's June 17,
2019 proposed approval of the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP provides an
extensive discussion of the control strategy and attainment
demonstrations for the upwind South Coast to attain the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ 84 FR 28132.
Table 2--District and CARB Aggregate Emission Reduction Commitments for
2023 in 2016 South Coast Ozone Plan
[Summer planning inventory, tpd] a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2023
Plan -------------------------------
NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD b................................ 23 6
CARB c.................................. 113 50-51
-------------------------------
Total............................... 136 56-57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Rounded to whole number.
\b\ 2016 AQMP, tables 4-9, 4-10 and 4-11. Reductions are from the 2012
base year.
\c\ 2016 State Strategy, Table 4, and CARB Resolution 17-7 (March 23,
2017). Reductions are from the 2012 base year.
Table 3--District Measures With Reductions by 2023 in 2016 AQMP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emission
Reductions VOC emission
No. Title Adoption Implementation period (tpd) reductions
(tpd)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMB-01................................... Transition to Zero and Near- 2018 Ongoing........................ 2.5 \a\ 1.2
Zero Emission Technologies
for Stationary Sources.
CMB-02................................... Emission Reductions from 2018 2020-2031...................... 1.1 ..............
Replacement with Zero or
Near-Zero NOX Appliances in
Commercial and Residential
Applications
CMB-03................................... Emission Reductions from Non- 2018 2020........................... 1.4 \a\ 0.4
Refinery Flares.
CMB-04................................... Emission Reductions from 2018 2022........................... 0.8 ..............
Restaurant Burners and
Residential Cooking.
BCM-10................................... Emission Reductions from 2019 2020........................... .............. 1.5
Greenwaste Composting.
FUG-01................................... Improved Leak Detection and 2019 2022........................... .............. 2.0
Repair.
CTS-01................................... Further Emission Reductions 2017/2021 2020-2031...................... .............. 1.0
from Coatings, Solvents,
Adhesives, and Sealants.
ECC-02................................... Co-Benefits from Existing 2018 Ongoing........................ 0.3 \a\ 0.1
Residential and Commercial
Building Energy Efficiency
Measures
ECC-03................................... Additional Enhancements in 2018 Ongoing........................ 1.2 \a\ 0.2
Reducing Existing
Residential Building Energy
Use.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Sources Totals........................................................................................... 7.3 6.4
[[Page 2962]]
MOB-10................................... Extension of the SOON \b\ NA Ongoing........................ 1.9 ..............
Provision for Construction/
Industrial Equipment.
MOB-11................................... Extended Exchange Program... NA Ongoing........................ 2.9 ..............
MOB-14................................... Emission Reductions from NA 2016-2024...................... 11 ..............
Incentive Programs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile Sources Totals............................................................................................... 15.8 ..............
Stationary and Mobile Sources Totals............................................................................ 23.1 6.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Corresponding VOC reductions from other measures.
\b\ Surplus Off-Road Opt-In for NOX Program
The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2016 AQMP, tables 4-2, 4-4, 4-9, 4-10 and 4-11.
Table 4--Measures With Reductions by 2023 in CARB's 2016 State Strategy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation NOX Emission
---------------------------------------------- Reductions VOC emission
Title Adoption (tpd) reductions
Time frame Agency (tpd)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Road Light-Duty:
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 7 16
Technologies \a\.
On-Road Heavy-Duty:
Lower In-Use Emission Performance 2017-2020...................... 2018 + CARB........................ NYQ <0.1
Level.
Innovative Clean Transit............. 2017........................... 2018 CARB........................ <0.1 <0.1
Last Mile Delivery................... 2018........................... 2020 CARB........................ <0.1 <0.1
Incentive Funding to Achieve Further ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD................ 3 0.4
Emission Reductions from On-Road
Heavy Duty Vehicles \b\.
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 34 4
Technologies \a\.
Aircraft:
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 9 NYQ
Technologies \a\.
Locomotives:
More Stringent National Locomotive 2017........................... 2023 EPA......................... <0.1 <0.1
Emission Standards.
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 7 0.3
Technologies \a\.
Ocean-Going Vessels:
At-Berth Regulation Amendments....... 2017-2018...................... 2023 CARB........................ 0.3 <0.1
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 30 NYQ
Technologies \a\.
Off-Road Equipment:
Zero-Emission Airport Ground Support 2018........................... 2023 CARB........................ <0.1 <0.1
Equipment.
Small Off-Road Engines............... 2018-2020...................... 2022 CARB........................ 0.7 7
Low-Emission Diesel Requirement...... by 2020........................ 2023 CARB........................ 0.3 NYQ
Further Deployment of Cleaner ongoing........................ 2016 CARB, SCAQMD, EPA........... 21 21
Technologies \a\.
Consumer Products:
Consumer Products Program............ 2019-2021...................... 2020 + CARB........................ 0 1-2
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Total Emission Reductions........ ............................... .............. ............................ 113 50-51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ CARB requested the EPA approve the ``Further Deployment of Cleaner Technologies'' measures under the provisions of section 182(e)(5) of the CAA. In
today's action we also refer to these as new technology measures.
\b\ On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted the ``South Coast On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Incentive Measure.'' On April 25, 2019, the EPA proposed to approve the
measure as achieving 1 tpd of NOX reductions in 2023. See 84 FR 17365.
NYQ means not yet quantified.
The sum of the emissions values may not equal the total shown due to rounding of the numbers.
Source: 2016 State Strategy, Table 4; Attachment A to CARB Resolution 17-7 (March 23, 2017).
c. Attainment Demonstration
Chapter 7 of the 2016 AQMP includes a section entitled ``Ozone
Attainment Demonstration and Projections,'' which describes the
Coachella Valley's progress toward attaining the 1997, 2008, and 2015
ozone standards.\88\ For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2016 AQMP summarizes
the District's modeling for the area, and concludes that the measures
included in the control strategy (including CARB
[[Page 2963]]
commitments) will result in the area attaining the standards no later
than 2026. The WOE discussion in Appendix C of CARB's Staff Report for
the 2016 AQMP provides additional discussion of air quality trends and
projections in the Coachella Valley and determines that the area is on
track to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ 2016 AQMP, 7-35 to 7-40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
As discussed above in Section III.A of this notice, we are
proposing to approve the base year emissions inventory and to find that
the future year emissions projections in the 2016 AQMP reflect
appropriate calculation methods and that the latest planning
assumptions are properly supported by SIP-approved stationary and
mobile source measures. In the discussion below, we address our
findings for the modeling submitted with the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP. Because of the importance of ozone transport from the South
Coast to attainment in the Coachella Valley, and the close interactions
of the modeling for each area, we have considered the modeling for both
areas. Similar and additional discussion for the South Coast can be
found in our June 17, 2019 proposed action on the 2016 South Coast
Ozone SIP.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ 84 FR 28132.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of Appendix V of the 2016 AQMP, the EPA finds
that the photochemical modeling is adequate for purposes of supporting
the attainment demonstration.\90\ First, we note the extensive
discussion of modeling procedures, tests, and performance analyses
called for in the Modeling Protocol (i.e., Chapter 2 of Appendix V of
the 2016 AQMP) and the good model performance. Second, we find the WRF
meteorological model results and performance statistics, including
hourly time series graphs of wind speed, direction, and temperature for
both the South Coast and the Coachella Valley, to be satisfactory and
consistent with our Modeling Guidance.\91\ Performance was evaluated
for each month in each zone for the entire year of 2012.\92\ Diurnal
variation of temperature, humidity and surface wind are well
represented by WRF. Geographically, winds are predicted most accurately
at the inland urban receptor sites. Accurate wind predictions in this
region of elevated ozone concentrations is one of the most critical
factors to simulate chemical transport to the Coachella Valley.
Overall, the daily WRF simulation for 2012 provided representative
meteorological fields that characterized the observed conditions well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ The EPA's review of the modeling and attainment
demonstration is discussed in greater detail in section VI of the
TSD (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration'').
\91\ Modeling Guidance, 30.
\92\ Temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, and wind speed were
evaluated in terms of normalized gross bias and normalized gross
error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The model performance statistics for ozone are described in Chapter
5 of Appendix V and are based on the statistical evaluation recommended
in the Modeling Guidance. Model performance was provided for 8-hour
daily maximum ozone for Coachella Valley as well as other areas in the
Southern California modeling domain.\93\ A geographical bias is shown
in the time series, with over-prediction in coastal areas, and under-
prediction in the inland areas, including Coachella Valley.\94\ The
2016 AQMP also presents ozone frequency distributions, scatter plots,
and plots of bias against concentration. The scatter and density
scatter plots show low bias at high concentrations, and higher bias at
low concentrations. The low bias at high concentrations is important
because it reflects the model's capability to predict high
concentrations, in particular, the top 10 days that form the basis for
the RRF calculation. The supplemental hourly time series show generally
good performance, though many individual daily ozone peaks are
underpredicted. As noted above, however, the underprediction of
absolute ozone concentrations does not mean that future concentrations
will be underestimated. In addition, the WOE analysis presented in
Appendix C of CARB's Staff Report for the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP provides additional information with respect to the sensitivity to
emissions changes and further supports the model performance. We are
proposing to find the air quality modeling adequate to support the
attainment demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on reasonable
meteorological and ozone modeling performance, and supported by the
weight of evidence analyses. For additional information, please see
section VI of the TSD for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ 2016 AQMP Appendix V, Table V-5-8. These zones are
represented by the following ozone monitoring sites: ``Coastal''
(Costa Mesa, LAX, Long Beach, Mission Viejo, West Los Angeles);
``Urban Source'' (Anaheim, Central Los Angeles, Compton, La Habra,
Pico Rivera, Pomona); ``San Fernando'' (Reseda, Santa Clarita,
Burbank); ``Foothills'' (Azusa, Glendora, Pasadena); ``Urban
Receptor'' (Crestline, Fontana, Lake Elsinore, Mira Loma, Redlands,
Rubidoux, San Bernardino, Upland); and ``Coachella Valley'' (Palm
Springs and Indio).
\94\ The model performance varied by zone, with over-prediction
in the ``Coastal'' zone and under-prediction in the ``San
Fernando,'' and ``Foothills'' zones. The model ozone predictions in
the ``Urban Receptor'' zone agree reasonably well with the
measurements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Control Strategy
The Coachella Valley control strategy relies primarily on
previously adopted and future emissions reductions detailed in the 2016
South Coast Ozone SIP. As described in Section III.D.2.b above, a
significant portion of the emissions reductions needed to attain the
1997 ozone NAAQS in the South Coast by 2023 will be obtained through
previously adopted measures in the SIP, and the balance of the
reductions needed for attainment will result from enforceable
commitments to take certain specific actions within prescribed periods
and to achieve aggregate tonnage reductions of VOC or NOX by
specific years. The aggregate commitments provide the remaining
additional upwind reductions necessary for the Coachella Valley to
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 2026. In our October 1, 2019 approval of
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP, the EPA approved the control strategy,
including CARB's and the District's aggregate commitments, for the
South Coast to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\95\ For the reasons
described in that action, and based on the District's demonstration
specific to the Coachella Valley described above, we propose to find
the District's control strategy acceptable for purposes of attaining
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley. For additional
information, please see the TSD for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ See 84 FR 52005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Attainment Demonstration
Based on our proposed determinations that the photochemical
modeling and control strategy are acceptable, we propose to approve the
attainment demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1108.
E. Rate of Progress Plan and Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Requirements for RFP for ozone nonattainment areas are specified in
CAA sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1), and 182(c)(2)(B). Under CAA section
171(1), RFP is defined as meaning such annual incremental reductions in
emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required under part D
(``Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas'') of the CAA or as may
reasonably be required by the EPA
[[Page 2964]]
for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the
applicable date. CAA section 182(b)(1) specifically requires that ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above demonstrate a 15
percent reduction in VOC between the years of 1990 and 1996. The EPA
has typically referred to section 182(b)(1) as the rate of progress
(ROP) requirement. For ozone nonattainment areas classified as Serious
or higher, section 182(c)(2)(B) requires VOC reductions of at least 3
percent of baseline emissions per year, averaged over each consecutive
3-year period, beginning 6 years after the baseline year until the
attainment date. Under CAA section 182(c)(2)(C), a state may substitute
NOX emissions reductions for VOC emissions reductions.
Additionally, CAA section 182(c)(2)(B)(ii) allows an amount less than 3
percent of such baseline emissions each year if a state demonstrates to
the EPA that its plan includes all measures that can feasibly be
implemented in the area in light of technological achievability.
In the 2008 Ozone SRR, the EPA provides that areas classified
Moderate or higher will have met the ROP requirements of CAA section
182(b)(1) if the area has a fully approved 15 percent ROP plan for the
1-hour or 1997 ozone NAAQS.\96\ For such areas, the EPA interprets the
RFP requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2) to require areas classified
as Moderate to provide a 15 percent emissions reduction of ozone
precursors within 6 years of the baseline year. Areas classified as
Serious or higher must meet the RFP requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(B) by providing an 18 percent reduction of ozone precursors
in the first 6-year period, and an average ozone precursor emissions
reduction of 3 percent per year for all remaining 3-year periods
thereafter.\97\ The 2008 Ozone SRR allows substitution of
NOX reductions for VOC reductions to meet the CAA section
172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) RFP requirements.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ 70 FR 12264, 12271 (March 6, 2015).
\97\ Id.
\98\ Id.; 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except as specifically provided in CAA section 182(b)(1)(C),
emissions reductions from all SIP-approved, federally promulgated, or
otherwise SIP-creditable measures that occur after the baseline year
are creditable for purposes of demonstrating that the RFP targets are
met. Because the EPA has determined that the passage of time has caused
the effect of certain exclusions to be de minimis, the RFP
demonstration is no longer required to calculate and specifically
exclude reductions from measures related to motor vehicle exhaust or
evaporative emissions promulgated by January 1, 1990; regulations
concerning Reid vapor pressure promulgated by November 15, 1990;
measures to correct previous RACT requirements; and measures required
to correct previous inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs.\99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 Ozone SRR requires the RFP baseline year to be the most
recent calendar year for which a complete triennial inventory was
required to be submitted to the EPA. For the purposes of developing RFP
demonstrations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the applicable triennial
inventory year is 2011. As discussed previously, the 2008 Ozone SRR
provided states with the opportunity to use an alternative baseline
year for RFP,\100\ but that provision of the 2008 Ozone SRR was vacated
by the D.C. Circuit in the South Coast II decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ 40 CFR 51.1110(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
In response to the South Coast II decision, CARB developed the 2018
SIP Update to revise the RFP demonstrations in previously submitted
ozone SIPs, including the Coachella Valley RFP demonstration in the
2016 AQMP. The 2018 SIP Update includes updated emissions estimates for
the 2011 RFP baseline year, subsequent milestone years, and the
attainment year.\101\ To develop the 2011 RFP baseline inventory, CARB
relied on actual emissions reported from industrial point sources for
year 2011 and backcast emissions from smaller stationary sources and
area sources from 2012 to 2011 using the same growth and control
factors as was used for the 2016 AQMP. To develop the emissions
inventories for the RFP milestone years (i.e., 2017, 2020, 2023) and
attainment year (2026), CARB also relied upon the same growth and
control factors as the 2016 AQMP.\102\ For both sets of baseline
emissions inventories (those in the 2016 AQMP and those in the 2018 SIP
Update), emissions estimates reflect District rules adopted through
December 2015 and CARB rules adopted through November 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ 2018 SIP Update, RFP demonstration, section IX-B, 44 and
45.
\102\ Documentation for the Coachella Valley RFP baseline and
milestone emissions inventories is found in the 2018 SIP Update on
pages 4-5, 44-45, and Appendix A, pages A-23 to A-26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The updated RFP demonstration for Coachella Valley for the 2008
ozone NAAQS is shown in Table 5. The updated RFP demonstration
calculates future year VOC targets from the 2011 baseline, consistent
with CAA 182(c)(2)(B)(i), which requires reductions of ``at least 3
percent of baseline emissions each year,'' and it substitutes
NOX reductions for VOC reductions beginning in milestone
year 2020 to meet VOC emission targets.\103\ For the Coachella Valley,
CARB concludes that the RFP demonstration meets the applicable
requirements for each milestone year as well as the attainment year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ NOX substitution is permitted under EPA
regulations. See 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(i)(C) and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii)(B); and 70 FR 12264, at 12271 (March 6, 2015).
Table 5--RFP Demonstration for the Coachella Valley for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
[Summer planning inventory, tpd or percent]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2017 2020 2023 2026
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline VOC...................... 16.9 14.8.................... 14.5.................... 14.7................... 15.1
Required change since 2011 (VOC or .............. 18%..................... 27%..................... 36%.................... 45%
NOX), %.
Required reductions since 2011.... .............. 3.0..................... 4.6..................... 6.1.................... 7.6
Target VOC level.................. .............. 13.9.................... 12.3.................... 10.8................... 9.3
Apparent shortfall in VOC......... .............. -0.9.................... -2.2.................... -3.9................... -5.8
Apparent shortfall in VOC, %...... .............. -5.6%................... -13.0%.................. -23.0%................. -34.1%
VOC shortfall previously provided .............. 0.0%.................... 5.6%.................... 13.0%.................. 23.0%
by NOX substitution, %.
Actual VOC shortfall, %........... .............. -5.6%................... -7.5%................... -10.0%................. -11.1%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2965]]
NOX
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Baseline NOX...................... 29.8 18.1.................... 14.9.................... 10.2................... 9.1
Change in NOX since 2011.......... .............. 11.8.................... 15.0.................... 19.6................... 20.7
Change in NOX since 2011, %....... .............. 39.4%................... 50.2%................... 65.8%.................. 69.4%
NOX reductions used for VOC .............. 0%...................... 5.6%.................... 13.0%.................. 23.0%
substitution through last
milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 .............. 39.4%................... 44.6%................... 52.8%.................. 46.4%
available for VOC substitution in
this milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 used for .............. 5.6%.................... 7.5%.................... 10.0%.................. 11.1%
VOC substitution in this
milestone year, %.
NOX reductions since 2011 surplus .............. 33.9%................... 37.2%................... 42.9%.................. 35.3%
after meeting VOC substitution
needs in this milestone year, %.
Total shortfall for RFP........... .............. 0%...................... 0%...................... 0%..................... 0%
RFP met?.......................... .............. Yes..................... Yes..................... Yes.................... Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Table VII-2 of the 2018 SIP Update.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
In 2017, the EPA approved a 15 percent ROP plan for the Coachella
Valley.\104\ As a result, the District and CARB have met the ROP
requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) for the Coachella Valley and do
not need to demonstrate another 15 percent reduction in VOC for this
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ 82 FR 26854 (June 12, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the emissions inventory documentation in the
2016 AQMP and 2018 SIP Update, we find that CARB and the District have
used the most recent planning and activity assumptions, emissions
models, and methodologies in developing the RFP baseline and milestone
year emissions inventories. We have also reviewed the calculations in
Table VII-2 of the 2018 SIP Update (presented in Table 2 above) and
find that the District and CARB have used an appropriate calculation
method to demonstrate RFP. For these reasons, we have determined that
the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP demonstrates RFP, in each milestone
year and the attainment year, consistent with applicable CAA
requirements and EPA guidance. We therefore propose to approve the RFP
demonstrations for the Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS under
sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B) of the CAA and 40 CFR
51.1110(a)(2)(ii).
F. Transportation Control Strategies and Measures to Offset Emissions
Increases From Vehicle Miles Traveled
1. Stationary and Regulatory Requirements
Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires, in relevant part, a state
to submit, for each area classified as Serious or above, a SIP revision
that ``identifies and adopts specific enforceable transportation
control strategies and transportation control measures to offset any
growth in emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled or number of
vehicle trips in such area.'' \105\ Herein, we use ``VMT'' to refer to
vehicle miles traveled and refer to the related SIP requirement as the
``VMT emissions offset requirement.'' In addition, we refer to the SIP
revision intended to demonstrate compliance with the VMT emissions
offset requirement as the ``VMT emissions offset demonstration.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) includes three separate elements.
In short, under section 182(d)(1)(A), states are required to adopt
transportation control strategies and measures to offset growth in
emissions from growth in VMT, and, as necessary, in combination with
other emission reduction requirements, to demonstrate RFP and
attainment. For more information on the EPA's interpretation of the
three elements of section 182(d)(1)(A). See 77 FR 58067 58068
(September 19, 2012) (proposed withdrawal of approval of South Coast
VMT emissions offset demonstrations). In section III.F of this
document, we are addressing the first element of CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) (i.e., the VMT emissions offset requirement). In
sections III.E and D of this document, we are proposing to approve
the RFP and attainment demonstrations, respectively, for the 2008
ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley, and compliance with the second
and third elements of section 182(d)(1)(A) is predicated on final
approval of the RFP and attainment demonstrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA, the Ninth Circuit
ruled that additional transportation control measures are required
whenever vehicle emissions are projected to be higher than they would
have been had VMT not increased, even when aggregate vehicle emissions
are actually decreasing.\106\ In response to the court's decision, in
August 2012, the EPA issued a memorandum titled ``Implementing Clean
Air Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control Measures and
Transportation Control Strategies to Offset Growth in Emissions Due to
Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled'' (``August 2012 Guidance'').\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ See Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA, 632 F.3d.
584, at 596-597 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted as amended on January 27,
2012, 686 F.3d 668, further amended February 13, 2012 (``Association
of Irritated Residents'').
\107\ Memorandum dated August 30, 2012, Karl Simon, Director,
Transportation and Climate Division, Office of Transportation and
Air Quality, to Carl Edland, Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, EPA Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The August 2012 Guidance discusses the meaning of ``transportation
control strategies'' (TCS) and ``transportation control measures''
(TCM) and recommends that both TCSs and TCMs be included in the
calculations made for the purpose of determining the degree to which
any hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT should be
offset. Generally, TCS is a broad term that encompasses many types of
controls (including, for example, motor vehicle emissions limitations,
I/M programs, alternative fuel programs, other technology-based
measures, and TCMs) that would fit within the regulatory definition of
``control
[[Page 2966]]
strategy.'' \108\ A TCM is defined at 40 CFR 51.100(r) as ``any measure
that is directed toward reducing emissions of air pollutants from
transportation sources,'' including, but not limited to, those listed
in section 108(f) of the Clean Air Act. TCMs generally refer to
programs intended to reduce VMT, number of vehicle trips, or traffic
congestion, such as programs for improved public transit, designation
of certain lanes for passenger buses and high-occupancy vehicles, and
trip reduction ordinances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The August 2012 Guidance explains how states may demonstrate that
the VMT emissions offset requirement is satisfied in conformance with
the Court's ruling in Association of Irritated Residents. Under the
August 2012 Guidance, states would develop one emissions inventory for
the base year and three different emissions inventory scenarios for the
attainment year. For the attainment year, the state would present three
emissions estimates, two of which would represent hypothetical
emissions scenarios that would provide the basis to identify the
``growth in emissions'' due solely to the growth in VMT, and one that
would represent projected actual motor vehicle emissions after fully
accounting for projected VMT growth and offsetting emissions reductions
obtained by all creditable TCSs and TCMs. See the August 2012 Guidance
for specific details on how states might conduct the calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions should be calculated using VMT
in that year, and it should reflect all enforceable TCSs and TCMs in
place in the base year. This would include vehicle emissions standards,
state and local control programs, such as I/M programs or fuel rules,
and any additional implemented TCSs and TCMs that were already required
by or credited in the SIP as of that base year.
The first of the emissions calculations for the attainment year
would be based on the projected VMT and trips for that year and assume
that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited in the base year
inventory have been put in place since the base year. This calculation
demonstrates how emissions would hypothetically change if no new TCSs
or TCMs were implemented, and VMT and trips were allowed to grow at the
projected rate from the base year. This estimate would show the
potential for an increase in emissions due solely to growth in VMT and
trips. This represents a ``no action'' scenario. Emissions in the
attainment year in this scenario may be lower than those in the base
year due to the fleet that was on the road in the base year gradually
being replaced through fleet turnover; however, provided VMT and/or
numbers of vehicle trips will in fact increase by the attainment year,
they would still likely be higher than they would have been assuming
VMT had held constant.
The second of the attainment year's emissions calculations would
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited have been
put in place since the base year, but it would also assume that there
was no growth in VMT and trips between the base year and attainment
year. This estimate reflects the hypothetical emissions level that
would have occurred if no further TCMs or TCSs had been put in place
and if VMT and trip levels had held constant since the base year. Like
the ``no action'' attainment year estimate described above, emissions
in the attainment year may be lower than those in the base year due to
the fleet that was on the road in the base year gradually being
replaced by cleaner vehicles through fleet turnover, but in this case
they would not be influenced by any growth in VMT or trips. This
emissions estimate would reflect a ceiling on the attainment emissions
that should be allowed to occur under the statute as interpreted by the
court in Association of Irritated Residents because it shows what would
happen under a scenario in which no offsetting TCSs or TCMs have yet
been put in place and VMT and trips are held constant during the period
from the area's base year to its attainment year. This represents a
``VMT offset ceiling'' scenario. These two hypothetical status quo
estimates are necessary steps in identifying the target level of
emissions from which states would determine whether further TCMs or
TCSs, beyond those that have been adopted and implemented in reality,
would need to be adopted and implemented in order to fully offset any
increase in emissions due solely to VMT and trips identified in the
``no action'' scenario.
Finally, the state would present the emissions that are actually
expected to occur in the area's attainment year after taking into
account reductions from all enforceable TCSs and TCMs. This estimate
would be based on the VMT and trip levels expected to occur in the
attainment year (i.e., the VMT and trip levels from the first estimate)
and all of the TCSs and TCMs expected to be in place and for which the
SIP will take credit in the area's attainment year, including any TCMs
and TCSs put in place since the base year. This represents the
``projected actual'' attainment year scenario. If this emissions
estimate is less than or equal to the emissions ceiling that was
established in the second of the attainment year calculations, the TCSs
or TCMs for the attainment year would be sufficient to fully offset the
identified hypothetical growth in emissions.
If, instead, the estimated projected actual attainment year
emissions are still greater than the ceiling which was established in
the second of the attainment year emissions calculations, even after
accounting for post-baseline year TCSs and TCMs, the state would need
to adopt and implement additional TCSs or TCMs to further offset the
growth in emissions. The additional TCSs or TCMs would need to bring
the actual emissions down to at least the VMT offset ceiling estimated
in the second of the attainment year calculations, in order to meet the
VMT offset requirement of section 182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by the
Court.
2. Summary of State's Submission
CARB prepared the VMT emissions offset demonstration for the
Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the District included it
in Chapter 7 of the 2016 AQMP.\109\ In addition to the VMT emissions
offset demonstration, Appendix VI-E of the 2016 AQMP includes two
attachments--one listing the TCSs adopted by CARB since 1990 and
another listing the TCMs developed by SCAG (as of September 2014) in
the South Coast. As described above in section III.C.2.b, none of these
TCMs apply in the Coachella Valley.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ 2016 AQMP, 7-32.
\110\ Appendix VI-E, Attachments VI-E-1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the VMT emissions offset demonstration, CARB used EMFAC2014,
the latest EPA-approved motor vehicle emissions model for California
available at the time the 2016 AQMP was developed.\111\ The EMFAC2014
model estimates the on-road emissions from two combustion processes
(i.e., running exhaust and start exhaust) and four evaporative
processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses, diurnal losses, and resting
losses). The EMFAC2014 model combines trip-based VMT data from the
regional transportation planning agency (i.e., SCAG), starts data based
on household travel surveys, and vehicle population data from the
California Department of Motor Vehicles. These sets of data are
[[Page 2967]]
combined with corresponding emission rates to calculate emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved and announced the
availability of EMFAC2017, the latest update to the EMFAC model for
use by State and local governments to meet CAA requirements. See 84
FR 41717.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions from running exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak, and
running losses are a function of how much a vehicle is driven.
Emissions from these processes are thus directly related to VMT and
vehicle trips, and CARB included these emissions in the calculations
that provide the basis for the Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration. CARB did not include emissions from resting loss and
diurnal loss processes in the analysis because such emissions are
related to vehicle population, not to VMT or vehicle trips, and thus
are not part of ``any growth in emissions from growth in vehicle miles
traveled or numbers of vehicle trips in such area'' under CAA section
182(d)(1)(A).
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset demonstration uses a 2012
base year. The base year for VMT emissions offset demonstration
purposes should generally be the same base year used for nonattainment
planning purposes. In section III.A of this document, the EPA is
proposing to approve the 2012 base year inventory for the Coachella
Valley for the purposes of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and thus, CARB's
selection of 2012 as the base year for the Coachella Valley VMT
emissions offset demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is appropriate.
The Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset demonstration also
includes the previously described three different attainment year
scenarios (i.e., no action, VMT offset ceiling, and projected actual).
The 2016 AQMP provides a demonstration of attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley by the applicable attainment date, based
on the controlled 2026 emissions inventory. As described in section
III.D of this document, the EPA is proposing to approve the attainment
demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the Coachella Valley, and
thus, we find CARB's selection of year 2026 as the attainment year for
the VMT emissions offset demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS to be
acceptable.
Table 6 summarizes the relevant distinguishing parameters for each
of the emissions scenarios and shows CARB's corresponding VOC emissions
estimates for the demonstration for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Table 6--VMT Emissions Offset Inventory Scenarios and Results for 2008 Ozone NAAQS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VMT Starts Controls VOC Emissions
Scenario -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1,000/day Year 1,000/day Year tpd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Year............................................... 2012 11,403 2012 2,007 2012 4.8
No Action............................................... 2026 14,977 2026 2,738 2012 3.1
VMT Offset Ceiling...................................... 2012 11,403 2012 2,007 2012 2.5
Projected Actual........................................ 2026 14,977 2026 2,738 2026 2.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2016 AQMP, Tables 7-9 and 7-10.
For the base year scenario, CARB ran the EMFAC2014 model for the
2012 base year using VMT and starts data corresponding to that year. As
shown in Table 6, CARB estimates the Coachella Valley VOC emissions at
4.8 tpd in 2012.
For the ``no action'' scenario, CARB first identified the on-road
motor vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs \112\) put in place since
the base year and incorporated into EMFAC2014, and then ran EMFAC2014
with the VMT and starts data corresponding to the 2026 attainment year
without the emissions reductions from the on-road motor vehicle control
programs put in place after the base year. Thus, the no action scenario
reflects the hypothetical VOC emissions in the attainment year if CARB
had not put in place any additional TCSs after 2012. As shown in Table
6, CARB estimates the ``no action'' Coachella Valley VOC emissions at
3.1 tpd in 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ As discussed in section III.C.2.b and C.3 of today's
notice, because of the significant influence of pollutant transport
from the South Coast Air Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella
Valley, no TCMs are reasonably available for implementation in the
Coachella Valley for the purposes of meeting the RACM requirement
and neither the District nor CARB rely on implementation of any TCMs
in the Coachella Valley to demonstrate implementation of RACM in the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. Similarly, no TCMs are included in
the VMT emissions offset demonstration for the Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the ``VMT offset ceiling'' scenario, CARB ran the EMFAC2014
model for the attainment year but with VMT and starts data
corresponding to base year values. Like the no action scenario, the
EMFAC2014 model was adjusted to reflect the VOC emissions levels in the
attainment years without the benefits of the post-base-year on-road
motor vehicle control programs. Thus, the VMT offset ceiling scenario
reflects hypothetical VOC emissions in the Coachella Valley if CARB had
not put in place any TCSs after the base year and if there had been no
growth in VMT or vehicle trips between the base year and the attainment
year.
The hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips
can be determined from the difference between the VOC emissions
estimates under the ``no action'' scenario and the corresponding
estimates under the ``VMT offset ceiling'' scenario. Based on the
values in Table 6, the hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth
in VMT and trips in the Coachella Valley would have been 0.6 tpd (i.e.,
3.1 tpd minus 2.5 tpd). This hypothetical difference establishes the
level of VMT growth-caused emissions that need to be offset by the
combination of post-baseline year TCSs and any necessary additional
TCSs.
For the ``projected actual'' scenario calculation, CARB ran the
EMFAC2014 model for the attainment year with VMT and starts data at
attainment year values and with the full benefits of the relevant post-
baseline year motor vehicle control programs. For this scenario, CARB
included the emissions benefits from TCSs put in place since the base
year. Between 2015 and 2026, VOC emissions from light-duty passenger
vehicles in the Coachella Valley are projected to decline an additional
54 percent.\113\ The most significant measures reducing VOC emissions
during the 2012 to 2026 timeframe include the Advanced Clean Cars
program, Zero Emission Vehicle requirements, and more stringent on-
board diagnostics requirements.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ Staff Report, ARB Review of the 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley,
Release Date: March 7, 2017, Appendix C, Coachella Valley Weight of
Evidence, C-9.
\114\ Attachment V-E-1 to Appendix VI of the 2016 AQMP includes
a list of the State's transportation control strategies adopted by
CARB since 1990. Also see EPA final action on CARB mobile source SIP
submittals at 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016), 82 FR 14446 (March 21,
2017), and 83 FR 23232 (May 18, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2968]]
As shown in Table 6, the projected actual attainment-year VOC
emissions are 2.0 tpd. CARB compared this value against the
corresponding VMT offset ceiling value to determine whether additional
TCSs or TCMs would need to be adopted and implemented in order to
offset any increase in emissions due solely to VMT and trips. Because
the projected actual emissions are less than the corresponding VMT
offset ceiling emissions, CARB concluded that the demonstration shows
compliance with the VMT emissions offset requirement and that the
adopted TCSs are sufficient to offset the growth in emissions from the
growth in VMT and vehicle trips in the Coachella Valley for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
Based on our review of Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset
demonstration in Chapter 7 of the 2016 AQMP, we find CARB's analysis to
be consistent with our August 2012 Guidance and consistent with the
emissions and vehicle activity estimates provided by CARB in support of
the 2016 AQMP. We agree that CARB and SCAG have adopted sufficient TCSs
to offset the growth in emissions from growth in VMT and vehicle trips
in the Coachella Valley for the purposes of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Therefore, we propose to approve the Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstration element of the Coachella Valley Ozone SIP as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A).
G. Contingency Measures
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Under the CAA, SIPs for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas classified
under subpart 2 as Moderate or above must include contingency measures
consistent with sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). Contingency measures
are additional controls or measures to be implemented in the event an
area fails to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the attainment date.
The SIP should contain trigger mechanisms for the contingency measures,
specify a schedule for implementation, and indicate that the measure
will be implemented without significant further action by the state or
the EPA.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). See also 2008 Ozone SRR,
80 FR 12264, 12285 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the CAA nor the EPA's implementing regulations establish a
specific level of emissions reductions that implementation of
contingency measures must achieve, but the EPA's 2008 Ozone SRR
reiterates the EPA's policy that contingency measures should provide
for emissions reductions approximately equivalent to one year's worth
progress, amounting to reductions of 3 percent of the baseline
emissions inventory for the nonattainment area.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ 80 FR 12264, 12285 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has been the EPA's longstanding interpretation of CAA section
172(c)(9) that states may meet the contingency measure requirement by
relying on federal measures (e.g., federal mobile source measures based
on the incremental turnover of the motor vehicle fleet each year) and
local measures already scheduled for implementation that provide
emissions reductions in excess of those needed to provide for RFP or
expeditious attainment. The key is that the Act requires that
contingency measures provide for additional emissions reductions that
are not relied on for RFP or attainment and that are not included in
the RFP or attainment demonstrations as meeting part or all of the
contingency measure requirements. The purpose of contingency measures
is to provide continued emissions reductions while a plan is being
revised to meet the missed milestone or attainment date.
The EPA has approved numerous SIPs under this interpretation--i.e.,
SIPs that use as contingency measures one or more federal or local
measures that are in place and provide reductions in excess of the
reductions required by the attainment demonstration or RFP plan,\117\
and there is case law supporting the EPA's interpretation in this
regard.\118\ However, in Bahr v. EPA, the Ninth Circuit rejected the
EPA's interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9) as allowing for early
implementation of contingency measures.\119\ The Ninth Circuit
concluded that contingency measures must take effect at the time the
area fails to make RFP or attain by the applicable attainment date, not
before.\120\ Thus, within the geographic jurisdiction of the Ninth
Circuit, states cannot rely on early-implemented measures to comply
with the contingency measure requirements under CAA section 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9).\121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ See, e.g., 62 FR 15844 (April 3, 1997) (direct final rule
approving an Indiana ozone SIP revision); 62 FR 66279 (December 18,
1997) (final rule approving an Illinois ozone SIP revision); 66 FR
30811 (June 8, 2001) (direct final rule approving a Rhode Island
ozone SIP revision); 66 FR 586 (January 3, 2001) (final rule
approving District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia ozone SIP
revisions); and 66 FR 634 (January 3, 2001) (final rule approving a
Connecticut ozone SIP revision).
\118\ See, e.g., LEAN v. EPA, 382 F.3d 575 (5th Cir. 2004)
(upholding contingency measures that were previously required and
implemented where they were in excess of the attainment
demonstration and RFP SIP).
\119\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F.3d at 1235-1237 (9th Cir. 2016).
\120\ Id. at 1235-1237.
\121\ The Bahr v. EPA decision involved a challenge to an EPA
approval of contingency measures under the general nonattainment
area plan provisions for contingency measures in CAA section
172(c)(9), but given the similarity between the statutory language
in section 172(c)(9) and the ozone-specific contingency measure
provision in section 182(c)(9), we find that the decision affects
how both sections of the Act must be interpreted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The District and CARB had largely completed preparation of the 2016
AQMP prior to the Bahr v. EPA decision, and thus, it relies solely upon
surplus emissions reductions from already implemented control measures
in the milestone and attainment years to demonstrate compliance with
the contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and
182(c)(9).\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ 2016 AQMP, 4-51 and 4-52; Appendix VI-C, pages V-C-1 to V-
C-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2018 SIP Update, CARB revised the RFP demonstration for the
2008 ozone NAAQS for several districts, including the Coachella Valley,
and recalculated the extent of surplus emission reductions (i.e.,
surplus to meeting the RFP milestone requirement for a given milestone
year) in the milestone years. In light of the Bahr v. EPA decision,
however, the 2018 SIP Update does not rely on the surplus or
incremental emissions reductions to comply with the contingency
measures requirements of sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) but, to
provide context in which to review contingency measures for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, the 2018 SIP Update documents the extent to which future
baseline emissions would provide surplus emissions reductions beyond
those required to meet applicable RFP milestones. More specifically,
the 2018 SIP Update identifies one year's worth of RFP as approximately
0.5 tpd of VOC and estimates surplus NOX reductions as
ranging from approximately 10.1 tpd to 12.8 tpd depending upon the
particular RFP milestone year.\123\ For attainment contingency, the
2018 SIP Update identifies anticipated reductions from the State's
mobile source programs between 2026 and 2027.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ 2018 SIP Update, tables VII-2 and VII-5.
\124\ 2018 SIP Update, Table VII-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To comply with sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9), as interpreted in
the Bahr v. EPA decision, a state must develop, adopt and submit a
contingency measure to be triggered upon a failure to meet RFP
milestones or failure to attain the NAAQS by the applicable
[[Page 2969]]
attainment date regardless of the extent to which already-implemented
measures would achieve surplus emissions reductions beyond those
necessary to meet RFP milestones and beyond those predicted to achieve
attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, to fully address the contingency
measure requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley,
the District has committed to develop, adopt and submit a contingency
measure to CARB in sufficient time to allow CARB to submit the
contingency measure as a SIP revision to the EPA within 12 months of
the EPA's final conditional approval of the contingency measure element
of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP.\125\ The District's specific
commitment is to modify one or more existing rules, or adopt a new rule
or rules, to include a more stringent requirement or remove an
exemption if the EPA determines that the Coachella Valley nonattainment
area has missed an RFP milestone for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. More
specifically, the District has identified a list of 8 different rules
that the District is reviewing for inclusion of potential contingency
provisions. The rules and the types of revisions under review for
contingency purposes include, among others: amending existing Rule
1110.2 (``Emissions from Gaseous- and Liquid-Fueled Engines'') to
remove exemptions for orchard wind machines powered by internal
combustion engines and agricultural stationary engines; amending
existing Rule 1134 (``Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Stationary
Gas Turbines'') to require more stringent NOX limits for
outer continental shelf turbines and produced gas turbines and/or
remove or limit the exemptions for near-limit and low-use turbines; and
adopting new Rule 1150.3 (``NOX Reductions from Combustion
Equipment at Landfills'') to require more stringent NOX
limits through use of gas clean-up or other technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne Nastri, SCAQMD
Executive Officer, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB has separately committed to adopt and submit the District's
revised rule(s) to the EPA within one year of the EPA's final action on
the contingency measures element of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP.\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Michael Benjamin,
Chief, Air Quality and Science Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer,
Associate Director, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
Sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) require contingency measures to
address potential failure to achieve RFP milestones or failure to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. For the purposes of
evaluating the contingency measure element of the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP, we find it useful to distinguish between contingency
measures to address potential failure to achieve RFP milestones (``RFP
contingency measures'') and contingency measures to address potential
failure to attain the NAAQS (``attainment contingency measures'').
With respect to the RFP contingency measures requirement, we have
reviewed the surplus emissions estimates in each of the RFP milestone
years, as shown in the 2018 SIP Update, and find that the calculations
are correct. We therefore agree that the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone
SIP provides surplus emissions reductions well beyond those necessary
to demonstrate RFP in all of the RFP milestone years. While such
surplus emissions reductions in the RFP milestone years do not
represent contingency measures themselves, we believe they are relevant
in evaluating the adequacy of RFP contingency measures that are
submitted (or will be submitted) to meet the requirements of sections
172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).
In this case, the District and CARB have committed to develop,
adopt, and submit a revised District rule or rules, or a new rule or
rules, as an RFP contingency measure within one year of our final
action on the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP. The specific types of
revisions the District has committed to make upon an RPF milestone
failure, such as increasing the stringency of an existing requirement
or removing an exemption, would comply with the requirements in CAA
sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) because they would be undertaken if
the area fails to meet an RFP milestone and would take effect without
significant further action by the state or the EPA.
Neither the CAA nor the EPA's implementing regulations for the
ozone NAAQS establish a specific amount of emissions reductions that
implementation of contingency measures must achieve, but we generally
expect that contingency measures should provide for emissions
reductions approximately equivalent to one year's worth of RFP, which,
for ozone, amounts to reductions of 3 percent of the baseline emissions
inventory for the nonattainment area. For the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley, one year's worth of RFP is approximately 0.5 tpd of
VOC or 0.9 tpd of NOX reductions.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ The 2011 baseline for NOX and VOC is 29.8 tpd
and 16.9 tpd, respectively, as shown in tables VII-1 and VII-2 of
the 2018 SIP Update. Three percent of the baselines is 0.9 tpd of
NOX and 0.5 tpd of VOC, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this instance, because of the nature of the District's intended
contingency measure (i.e., to modify an existing rule or rules to
increase the stringency or to remove an exemption), the District did
not quantify the potential additional emission reductions from its
contingency measure commitment, but we believe that it is unlikely that
the RFP and attainment contingency measures, once adopted and
submitted, will in themselves achieve one year's worth of RFP (i.e.,
0.5 tpd of VOC or 0.9 tpd of NOX) given the types of rule
revisions under consideration and the magnitude of emissions reductions
constituting one year's worth of RFP. However, the 2018 SIP Update
provides the larger SIP planning context in which to judge the adequacy
of the to-be-submitted District contingency measure by calculating the
surplus emissions reductions estimated to be achieved in the RFP
milestone years and the attainment year. Table VII-2 in the 2018 SIP
Update identifies estimates of surplus NOX reductions in the
Coachella Valley for each RFP milestone year. These estimates range
from 33.9 percent in milestone year 2017 to 42.9 percent in milestone
year 2023.\128\ These values far eclipse one year's worth of RFP (i.e.,
3 percent, approximately 0.5 tpd of VOC or 0.9 tpd NOX) and
provide the basis to conclude that the risk of any failure to achieve
an RFP milestone for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley is
very low. The surplus reflects already implemented regulations and is
primarily the result of vehicle turnover, which refers to the ongoing
replacement by individuals, companies, and government agencies of
older, more polluting vehicles and engines with newer vehicles and
engines designed to meet more stringent CARB mobile source emission
standards. In light of the extent of surplus NOX emissions
reductions in the RFP milestone years, the emissions reductions from
the District contingency measure would be sufficient to meet the
contingency measure requirements of the CAA with respect to RFP
milestones, even though the measure would likely achieve emissions
reductions lower than the EPA normally recommends for reductions from
such a measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\128\ 2018 SIP Update, Table VII-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the attainment contingency measure, CARB estimated 0.31 tpd of
[[Page 2970]]
NOX and 0.01 tpd VOC surplus reductions in 2027,\129\ which
is short of the one year's worth of reductions necessary. We are not
proposing action on the attainment contingency measures at this time.
Attainment contingency measures are a distinct provision of the CAA
that we may act on separately from the attainment requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ 2026 baseline emissions minus 2027 baseline emissions. See
2018 SIP Update, Table VII-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, we propose to approve conditionally the RFP
contingency measure element of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP as
supplemented by commitments from the District and CARB to adopt and
submit contingency measures to meet the RFP and attainment contingency
measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). Our
proposed approval is conditional because it relies upon commitments to
adopt and submit specific enforceable contingency measures (i.e.,
revised or new District rule or rules with contingent provisions).
Conditional approvals are authorized under CAA section 110(k)(4) of the
CAA. We are not proposing action on the attainment contingency measure
at this time.
H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to conform to the SIP's goals of eliminating or
reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and
achieving timely attainment of the standards. Conformity to the SIP's
goals means that such actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute to
violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen the severity of an existing
violation, or (3) delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any interim
milestone.
Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to the
EPA's transportation conformity rule, codified at 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A. Under this rule, metropolitan planning organizations in
nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with state and local air
quality and transportation agencies, the EPA, the FHWA, and the FTA to
demonstrate that an area's regional transportation plans and
transportation improvement programs conform to the applicable SIP. This
demonstration is typically done by showing that estimated emissions
from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or ``budgets'')
contained in all control strategy SIPs. Budgets are generally
established for specific years and specific pollutants or precursors.
Ozone plans should identify budgets for on-road emissions of ozone
precursors (NOX and VOC) in the area for each RFP milestone
year and, if the plan demonstrates attainment, the attainment
year.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, the
EPA's adequacy criteria at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). To meet these
requirements, the budgets must be consistent with the attainment and
RFP requirements and reflect all of the motor vehicle control measures
contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations.\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\131\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more
information on the transportation conformity requirements and
applicable policies on MVEBs, please visit our transportation
conformity website at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a budget consists of
three basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP
submission; (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the
budget during a public comment period; and, (3) making a finding of
adequacy or inadequacy.\132\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\132\ 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The 2016 AQMP includes budgets for the 2018, 2021, and 2024 RFP
milestone years, and a 2026 attainment year. The budgets for 2018,
2021, and 2024 were derived from the 2012 RFP baseline year and the
associated RFP milestone years. The budgets are affected by the South
Coast II decision vacating the alternative baseline year provision, and
therefore, the EPA has not previously acted on the budgets. In the
submittal letters for the 2016 AQMP and the 2018 SIP Update, CARB
requested that the EPA limit the duration of our approval of the
budgets to last only until the effective date of future EPA adequacy
findings for replacement budgets.\133\ On September 9, 2019, CARB
provided further explanation in connection with its request to limit
the duration of the approval of the budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, and letter dated December 5, 2018, from Richard Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX.
\134\ Letter dated September 9, 2019, from Dr. Michael T.
Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to
Amy Zimpfer, Assistant Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2018 SIP Update revised the RFP demonstration consistent with
the South Coast II decision (i.e., by using a 2011 RFP baseline year)
and identifies new budgets for the Coachella Valley for VOC and
NOX for each updated RFP milestone year through 2026. The
budgets in this 2018 SIP Update replace all of the budgets contained in
the 2016 AQMP.
Like the budgets in the 2016 AQMP, the budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update were calculated using EMFAC2014, the version of CARB's EMFAC
model approved by the EPA for estimating emissions from on-road
vehicles operating in California at the time the 2016 AQMP and 2018 SIP
Update were developed. However, the budgets in the 2018 SIP Update
reflect updated VMT estimates from the 2016 RTP/SCS \135\ and are
rounded up to the nearest tenth tpd, instead of the nearest whole
number. Accordingly, the updated budgets are more precise, and they
align with the emissions inventory, RFP and attainment demonstrations
in the 2016 AQMP.\136\ The conformity budgets for NOX and
VOC in the 2018 SIP Update for the Coachella Valley are provided in
Table 7 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ 2016 RTP/SCS, Amendment 2, adopted by SCAG in July 2017.
\136\ For instance, the 2016 AQMP estimates that 2026 on-road
vehicle emissions (summer planning inventory) would be 2.93 tpd for
VOC and 4.12 tpd for NOX. See Appendix A, page A-23
through A-26. The corresponding budgets from the 2018 SIP Update are
3.0 tpd for VOC and 4.2 tpd for NOX. See Table 5 and
surrounding discussion in Section V of the TSD for this action for
additional detail.
Table 7--Transportation Conformity Budgets for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS in
the Coachella Valley
[Summer planning inventory, tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Year VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020.............................................. 3.7 8.4
2023.............................................. 3.3 4.6
2026.............................................. 3.0 4.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Table VII-3 of the 2018 SIP Update.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
As part of our review of the approvability of the budgets in the
2018 SIP Update, we have evaluated the budgets using our adequacy
criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). We will complete the adequacy
review concurrently with our final action on the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP. The EPA is not required under its transportation conformity
rule to find budgets adequate prior to proposing
[[Page 2971]]
approval of them.\137\ Today, the EPA is announcing that the adequacy
process for these budgets begins and the public has 30 days to comment
on their adequacy, per the transportation conformity regulation at 40
CFR 93.118(f)(2)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ Under the transportation conformity regulations, the EPA
may review the adequacy of submitted motor vehicle emission budgets
simultaneously with the EPA's approval or disapproval of the
submitted implementation plan. 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As documented in Table 4 of section V of the EPA's TSD for this
proposal, we preliminarily conclude that the budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update for the Coachella Valley meet each adequacy criterion. We have
completed our detailed review of the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
and are proposing herein to approve the SIP revision's attainment and
RFP demonstrations. We have also reviewed the budgets in the 2018 SIP
Update and found that they are consistent with the attainment and RFP
demonstrations for which we are proposing approval, are based on
control measures that have already been adopted and implemented, and
meet all other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements,
including the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.1118(e)(4) and (5).
Therefore, we are proposing to approve the 2020, 2023, and 2026 budgets
in the 2018 SIP Update (and shown in Table 7, above). At the point when
we finalize our adequacy process or approve the budgets for the 2008
ozone NAAQS in the 2018 SIP Update as proposed (whichever occurs first;
note that they could also occur concurrently per 40 CFR
93.118(f)(2)(iii)), then they will replace the budgets that we
previously found adequate for use in transportation conformity
determinations.\138\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ We found adequate the budgets from the 2008 Ozone Early
Progress Plan for the 1997 ozone NAAQS at 73 FR 25694 (May 7, 2008).
The budgets in the 2018 SIP Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS are
lower than the corresponding budgets approved for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. For instance, the current budgets of 7 tpd for VOC and 26 tpd
for NOX for all years, would be replaced by budgets of
3.7 tpd for VOC and 8.4 tpd for NOX in 2020, and 3.3 tpd
for VOC and 4.6 tpd for NOX in 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under our transportation conformity rule, as a general matter, once
budgets are approved, they cannot be superseded by revised budgets
submitted for the same CAA purpose and the same year(s) addressed by
the previously approved SIP submittal until the EPA approves the
revised budgets as a SIP revision. In other words, as a general matter,
such approved budgets cannot be superseded by revised budgets found
adequate, but rather only through approval of the revised budgets,
unless the EPA specifies otherwise in its approval of a SIP by limiting
the duration of the approval to last only until subsequently submitted
budgets are found adequate.\139\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\139\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this instance, CARB has requested that we limit the duration of
our approval of the budgets in the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP only
until the effective date of the EPA's adequacy finding for any
subsequently submitted budgets, and in September 2019, CARB provided
further explanation for its request.\140\ Generally, we will consider a
state's request to limit an approval of a budget only if the request
includes the following elements: \141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ CARB's request to limit the duration of the approval of
the Coachella Valley ozone MVEB is contained in a letter dated
September 9, 2019, from Michael Benjamin, Chief, Air Quality and
Science Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, EPA
Region IX.
\141\ 67 FR 69141 (November 15, 2002), limiting our prior
approval of MVEB in certain California SIPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An acknowledgement and explanation as to why the budgets
under consideration have become outdated or deficient;
A commitment to update the budgets as part of a
comprehensive SIP update; and
A request that the EPA limit the duration of its approval
to the time when new budgets have been found to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes.
CARB's request includes an explanation for why the budgets have
become, or will become, outdated or deficient. In short, CARB has
requested that we limit the duration of the approval of the budgets in
light of the EPA's recent approval of EMFAC2017, an updated version of
the model (EMFAC2014) used for the budgets in the 2016 Coachella Valley
Ozone SIP.\142\ EMFAC2017 updates vehicle mix and emissions data of the
previously approved version of the model, EMFAC2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\142\ On August 15, 2019, the EPA approved and announced the
availability of EMFAC2017, the latest update to the EMFAC model for
use by State and local governments to meet CAA requirements. See 84
FR 41717.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preliminary calculations by CARB indicate that EMFAC2017-derived
motor vehicle emissions estimates for the Coachella Valley will exceed
the corresponding EMFAC2014-derived budgets in the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP. In light of the approval of EMFAC2017, CARB explains
that the budgets from the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP, for which we
are proposing approval in today's action, will become outdated and will
need to be revised using EMFAC2017. In addition, CARB states that,
without the ability to replace the budgets using the budget adequacy
process, the benefits of using the updated data may not be realized for
a year or more after the updated SIP revision (with the EMFAC2017-
derived budgets) is submitted, due to the length of the SIP approval
process. We find that CARB's explanation for limiting the duration of
the approval of the budgets is appropriate and provides us with a
reasonable basis on which to limit the duration of the approval of the
budgets.
We note that CARB has not committed to update the budgets as part
of a comprehensive SIP update, but as a practical matter, CARB must
submit a SIP revision that includes updated demonstrations as well as
the updated budgets to meet the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4); \143\ and thus, we do not need a specific commitment for
such a plan at this time. For the reasons provided above, and in light
of CARB's explanation for why the budgets will become outdated and
should be replaced upon an adequacy finding for updated budgets, we
propose to limit the duration of our approval of the budgets in the
2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP until we find revised budgets based on
EMFAC2017 to be adequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), the EPA will not find a budget
in a submitted SIP to be adequate unless, among other criteria, the
budgets, when considered together with all other emissions sources,
are consistent with applicable requirements for RFP and attainment.
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Other Clean Air Act Requirements Applicable to Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Areas
In addition to the SIP requirements discussed in the previous
sections, the CAA includes certain other SIP requirements applicable to
Severe ozone nonattainment areas, such as the Coachella Valley. We
describe these provisions and their current status below.
1. Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs
Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2 as Serious or above to
implement an enhanced motor vehicle I/M program in those areas. The
requirements for those programs are provided in CAA section 182(c)(3)
and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
Consistent with the 2008 Ozone SRR, no new I/M programs are
currently required for nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.\144\ The EPA previously approved California's I/M program in
Coachella Valley as meeting
[[Page 2972]]
the requirements of the CAA and applicable EPA regulations for enhanced
I/M programs.\145\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\144\ 2008 Ozone SRR, 80 FR 12264, at 12283 (March 6, 2015).
\145\ 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. New Source Review Rules
Section 182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires states to develop SIP
revisions containing permit programs for each of its ozone
nonattainment areas. The SIP revisions are to include requirements for
permits in accordance with CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173 for the
construction and operation of each new or modified major stationary
source for VOC and NOX anywhere in the nonattainment
area.\146\ The 2008 Ozone SRR includes provisions and guidance for
nonattainment new source review (NSR) programs.\147\ The EPA has
previously approved the District's NSR rules as they apply to Coachella
Valley into the SIP based in part on a conclusion that the rules
adequately addressed the NSR requirements specific to Severe
areas.\148\ On December 13, 2018, the EPA approved the District's 2008
ozone certification that its NSR program previously approved into the
SIP is adequate to meet the requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\149\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\146\ See also CAA section 182(e).
\147\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
\148\ On December 4, 1996 (61 FR 64291), the EPA approved
SCAQMD's NSR rules (the District's Regulation XIII) as satisfying
the NSR requirements in title I, part D of the CAA for Extreme
(South Coast) and Severe (Coachella Valley) ozone nonattainment
areas.
\149\ 83 FR 64026 (December 13, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Clean Fuels Fleet Program
Sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246 of the CAA require California to
submit to the EPA for approval measures to implement a Clean Fuels
Fleet Program in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Serious and
above. Section 182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows states to opt out of the
federal clean-fuel vehicle fleet program by submitting a SIP revision
consisting of a program or programs that will result in at least
equivalent long-term reductions in ozone precursors and toxic air
emissions.
In 1994, CARB submitted a SIP revision to the EPA to opt out of the
federal clean-fuel fleet program. The submittal included a
demonstration that California's low-emissions vehicle program achieved
emissions reductions at least as large as would be achieved by the
federal program. The EPA approved the SIP revision to opt out of the
federal program on August 27, 1999.\150\ There have been no changes to
the federal Clean Fuels Fleet program since the EPA approved the
California SIP revision to opt out of the federal program, and thus, no
corresponding changes to the SIP are required. Thus, we find that the
California SIP revision to opt out of the federal program, as approved
in 1999, meets the requirements of CAA sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246
for Coachella Valley for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\150\ 64 FR 46849 (August 27, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gasoline Vapor Recovery
Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA requires states to submit a SIP
revision by November 15, 1992, that requires owners or operators of
gasoline dispensing systems to install and operate gasoline vehicle
refueling vapor recovery (``Stage II'') systems in ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Moderate and above. California's ozone
nonattainment areas implemented Stage II vapor recovery well before the
passage of the CAA Amendments of 1990.\151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\151\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13514 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA requires the EPA to promulgate
standards requiring motor vehicles to be equipped with onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) systems. The EPA promulgated the first
set of ORVR system regulations in 1994 for phased implementation on
vehicle manufacturers, and since the end of 2006, essentially all new
gasoline-powered light and medium-duty vehicles are ORVR-equipped.\152\
Section 202(a)(6) also authorizes the EPA to waive the SIP requirement
under CAA section 182(b)(3) for installation of Stage II vapor recovery
systems after such time as the EPA determines that ORVR systems are in
widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet. Effective May 16,
2012, the EPA waived the requirement of CAA section 182(b)(3) for Stage
II vapor recovery systems in ozone nonattainment areas regardless of
classification.\153\ Thus, a SIP submittal meeting CAA section
182(b)(3) is not required for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\152\ 77 FR 28772, at 28774 (May 16, 2012).
\153\ 40 CFR 51.126(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While a SIP submittal meeting CAA section 182(b)(3) is not required
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, under California state law (i.e., Health and
Safety Code section 41954), CARB is required to adopt procedures and
performance standards for controlling gasoline emissions from gasoline
marketing operations, including transfer and storage operations. State
law also authorizes CARB, in cooperation with local air districts, to
certify vapor recovery systems, to identify defective equipment and to
develop test methods. CARB has adopted numerous revisions to its vapor
recovery program regulations and continues to rely on its vapor
recovery program to achieve emissions reductions in ozone nonattainment
areas in California.
In the Coachella Valley, the installation and operation of CARB-
certified vapor recovery equipment is required and enforced by SCAQMD
Rules 461 (``Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing'') and 462 (``Organic
Liquid Loading''). These rules were most recently approved into the SIP
on April 11, 2013, and July 21, 1999, respectively.\154\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\154\ 78 FR 21542 and 64 FR 39037.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Enhanced Ambient Air Monitoring
Section 182(c)(1) of the CAA requires that all ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Serious or above implement measures to enhance and
improve monitoring for ambient concentrations of ozone, NOX,
and VOC, and to improve monitoring of emissions of NOX and
VOC. The enhanced monitoring network for ozone is referred to as the
photochemical assessment monitoring station (PAMS) network. The EPA
promulgated final PAMS regulations on February 12, 1993.\155\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\155\ 58 FR 8452 (February 12, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 10, 1993, CARB submitted to the EPA a SIP revision
addressing the PAMS network for six ozone nonattainment areas,
including the Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area
(SE Desert AQMA), to meet the enhanced monitoring requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(1) and the PAMS regulations for the 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. The SE Desert AQMA included portions of Los Angeles, Riverside,
and San Bernardino counties, including the area that would later be
designated as the Riverside County (Coachella Valley) ozone
nonattainment area for the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA
determined that the PAMS SIP revision met all applicable requirements
for enhanced monitoring and approved the PAMS submittal into the
California SIP.\156\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\156\ 82 FR 45191 (September 28, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 AQMP discusses compliance with the CAA section 182(c)(1)
enhanced monitoring requirements in terms of the District's ``Annual
Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July 2016)'' (ANP).\157\ The
District's 2016 ANP describes the steps taken to address the
requirements of section 182(c)(1), includes descriptions of the PAMS
program and
[[Page 2973]]
provides additional details about the PAMS network.\158\ The EPA
approved the District's PAMS network as part of our annual approval of
the District's ANP.\159\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\157\ 2016 AQMP, Table 6-2.
\158\ 2016 ANP, 13-15, 28 and Appendix A, 8. Starting in 2007,
the EPA's monitoring rules at 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006)
required the submittal and EPA action on ANPs. SCAQMD's 2016 ANP can
be found in the docket for today's action.
\159\ Letter dated October 31, 2016, from Gwen Yoshimura, EPA
Region IX to Matt Miyasoto, Deputy Executive Officer, SCAQMD,
approving the 2016 South Coast ANP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to 2006, the EPA's ambient air monitoring regulations in 40
CFR part 58 (``Ambient Air Quality Surveillance'') set forth specific
SIP requirements (see former 40 CFR 52.20). In 2006, the EPA
significantly revised and reorganized 40 CFR part 58.\160\ Under
revised 40 CFR part 58, SIP revisions are no longer required; rather,
compliance with EPA monitoring regulations is established through
review of required annual monitoring network plans.\161\ The 2008 Ozone
SRR made no changes to these requirements.\162\ Therefore, based on our
review and approval of the 2016 ANP for South Coast, including the
Coachella Valley, we find that the 2016 Coachella Valley Ozone SIP
adequately addresses the enhanced monitoring requirements under CAA
section 182(c)(1), and we propose to approve that portion of the plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\160\ 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006).
\161\ 40 CFR 58.2(b) now provides ``The requirements pertaining
to provisions for an air quality surveillance system in the SIP are
contained in this part.''
\162\ The 2008 ozone SRR addresses PAMS-related requirements at
80 FR 12264, at 12291 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. CAA Section 185 Fee Program
Sections 182(d)(3) and 185 of the CAA require that the SIP for each
Severe and Extreme ozone nonattainment area provide that, if the area
fails to attain by its applicable attainment date, each major
stationary source of VOC and NOX located in the area shall
pay a fee to the state as a penalty for such failure for each calendar
year beginning after the attainment date, until the area is
redesignated as an attainment area for ozone. States are not yet
required to submit a SIP revision that meets the requirements of CAA
section 185 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\163\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\163\ See 40 CFR 51.1117. For the Coachella Valley, a section
185 SIP revision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS will be due on July 20,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proposed Action
For the reasons discussed in this notice, under CAA section
110(k)(3), the EPA is proposing to approve as a revision to the
California SIP the following portions of the Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan submitted by CARB on April 27, 2017, and the 2018 SIP
Update submitted on December 5, 2018, that compose the 2016 Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP.
Base year emissions inventory element in the 2016 AQMP as
meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) and 40
CFR 51.1115 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
RACM demonstration element in the 2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1112(c) for the
2008 ozone NAAQS;
Attainment demonstration element for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
in the 2016 AQMP as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1108;
ROP demonstration element in the 2016 AQMP as meeting the
requirements of CAA 182(b)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS;
RFP demonstration element in the 2018 SIP Update as
meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1), and
182(c)(2)(B), and 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(2)(ii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
VMT emissions offset demonstration element in the 2016
AQMP as meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
Motor vehicle emissions budgets in the 2018 SIP Update for
the 2020 and 2023 RFP milestone years and the 2026 attainment year (see
Table 7) because they are consistent with the RFP and attainment
demonstrations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS proposed for approval herein
and meet the other criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e);
Enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance program
element in the 2016 AQMP as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS;
Clean fuels fleet program element in the 2016 AQMP as
meeting the requirements of CAA sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246 and 40
CFR 51.1102 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; and
Enhanced monitoring element in the 2016 AQMP as meeting
the requirements of CAA section 182(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.\164\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\164\ Regarding other applicable requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley, the EPA has previously approved SIP
revisions that address the nonattainment area requirements for NSR
and for implementation of RACT for the South Coast, including the
Coachella Valley, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 83 FR 64026
(December 13, 2018) (NSR) and 82 FR 43850 (September 20, 2017)
(RACT). SIP revisions for the Coachella Valley addressing the
penalty fee requirements under CAA sections 181(b)(4) and 185 are
not yet due for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the MVEBs, we are proposing to limit the duration
of the approval of the MVEBs to last only until the effective date of
the EPA's adequacy finding for any subsequently submitted budgets. We
are doing so at CARB's request and in light of the benefits of using
EMFAC2017-derived budgets prior to our taking final action on the
future SIP revision that includes the updated budgets.
We are also proposing that paragraphs (e)(1)(A) and (B), (e)(2),
(e)(5) and (e)(8) of District Rule 301 (``Permitting and Associated
Fees''), submitted to the EPA on August 5, 2019, and approved on
October 1, 2019, at 84 FR 52005, meet the emission statement
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1102 for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
Lastly, we are proposing, under CAA section 110(k)(4), to
conditionally approve the contingency measure element of the Coachella
Valley Ozone SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9) for RFP contingency measures. Our proposed approval is
based on commitments by the District and CARB to supplement the element
through submission, as a SIP revision (within one year of final
conditional approval action), of a new or revised District rule or
rules that would include a more stringent requirement or would remove
an exemption if an RFP milestone is not met.\165\ We are not proposing
action on the attainment contingency measure at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\165\ Letter dated August 2, 2019, from Wayne Nastri, SCAQMD
Executive Officer, to Richard Corey, CARB Executive Officer; and
letter dated September 9, 2019, from Michael Benjamin, Chief, Air
Quality and Science Division, CARB, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate
Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
for the next 30 days and will consider comments before taking final
action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
[[Page 2974]]
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve, or
conditionally approve, state plans 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 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 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 (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, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 19, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-00538 Filed 1-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P