Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans and Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date; California; San Joaquin Valley Serious Area and Section 189(d) Plan for Attainment of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5, 4503-4508 [2022-01728]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
4503
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
EPA believes that this action does not
have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The effect of this action triggers
additional planning requirements under
the CAA.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by March 29, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review, does not
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: January 6, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In § 52.1170, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by adding an entry for
‘‘Determination of failure to attain the
2010 SO2 standard’’ immediately after
the entry for ‘‘2010 Sulfur Dioxide Clean
Data Determination’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1170
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory
SIP provision
*
Determination of failure
to attain the 2010 SO2
standard.
*
State
submittal
date
Applicable geographic
or nonattainment area
*
Detroit area (Wayne
County, part).
*
*
....................
EPA approval date
*
1/28/2022, [INSERT
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION].
*
[FR Doc. 2022–00607 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
*
Comments
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
[EPA–R09–OAR–2021–0261; FRL–8969–02–
R9]
Partial Approval and Partial
Disapproval of Air Quality
Implementation Plans and
Determination of Attainment by the
Attainment Date; California; San
Joaquin Valley Serious Area and
Section 189(d) Plan for Attainment of
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
*
*
Triggers requirements of CAA section 179(d) for
the State of Michigan to submit by January 30,
2023, a revision to its SIP for the Detroit area
that, among other elements, provides for expeditious attainment of the 2010 SO2 standard
within the time period specified in CAA sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2).
Sfmt 4700
*
*
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve in part and disapprove in part
portions of state implementation plan
(SIP) revisions submitted by California
to address Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements for the 1997 24-hour fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or ‘‘standards’’) in the San Joaquin
Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area.
Specifically, the EPA is approving all
but the contingency measures element
of the submitted SIP revisions as
meeting all applicable ‘‘Serious’’ area
and CAA section 189(d) requirements
for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and
is disapproving the contingency
measures element. The EPA is also
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4504
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
finalizing a determination that the San
Joaquin Valley air quality planning area
has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date. This determination is based on
sufficient, quality-assured, and certified
data for 2018–2020. Based on our
finding that the San Joaquin Valley area
has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date, we are also finalizing a
determination that the requirement for
contingency measures will no longer
apply to the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. Lastly, the EPA is
issuing a protective finding for
transportation conformity
determinations for the disapproval of
the contingency measures element.
DATES: This rule is effective on February
28, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2021–0261. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information. If
you need assistance in a language other
than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office
(ARD–2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415)
972–3877, or by email at
graham.ashleyr@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Proposed Rule
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Proposed Rule
On September 24, 2021, the EPA
proposed to approve in part and
disapprove in part portions of SIP
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
revisions submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) to meet
CAA requirements for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley
PM2.5 nonattainment area.1 The San
Joaquin Valley is classified as a Serious
nonattainment area for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and is also subject to
CAA section 189(d) requirements
because of the failure of the area to
attain the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
by the area’s original Serious area
attainment date (i.e., December 31,
2015). The EPA’s determination that the
area failed to attain the original
December 31, 2015 attainment date
triggered the requirement for the state to
submit the SIP revisions on which the
EPA is taking final action in this
document.
The SIP revisions on which we
proposed action are those portions of
the ‘‘2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and
2012 PM2.5 Standards’’ (‘‘2018 PM2.5
Plan’’) 2 and the ‘‘San Joaquin Valley
Supplement to the 2016 State Strategy
for the State Implementation Plan’’
(‘‘Valley State SIP Strategy’’) 3 that
pertain to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. CARB submitted the 2018
PM2.5 Plan and Valley State SIP Strategy
to the EPA as a revision to the California
SIP on May 10, 2019. We refer to the
portions of these two SIP submissions
that pertain to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS collectively as the ‘‘SJV PM2.5
Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan.’’ The SJV PM2.5 Plan
addresses the Serious area and CAA
section 189(d) attainment plan
requirements for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley,
including the demonstration that the
area would attain those NAAQS by
December 31, 2020.
The EPA proposed to approve the
2013 base year emissions inventories,
the precursor demonstration, the best
available control measures/best
available control technology (BACM/
BACT) demonstration, the five percent
annual emissions reduction
demonstration, the attainment
demonstration, the reasonable further
progress (RFP) demonstration, and the
quantitative milestones demonstration
in the SJV PM2.5 Plan as meeting the
Serious nonattainment area and CAA
section 189(d) planning requirements
for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. We
also proposed to approve the motor
1 86
FR 53150.
2018 PM2.5 Plan was adopted by the San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District on November 15, 2018, and by CARB on
January 24, 2019. The 2018 PM2.5 Plan includes a
revised version of Appendix H submitted by CARB
as a technical correction on February 11, 2020.
3 The Valley State SIP Strategy was adopted by
CARB on October 25, 2018.
2 The
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and
2020 and the inter-pollutant trading
mechanism provided for use in
transportation conformity analyses.
Based on complete (or otherwise
deemed sufficient), quality-assured, and
certified ambient air quality monitoring
data for the 2018–2020 monitoring
period, the EPA also proposed to
determine that the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area attained the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the December
31, 2020 attainment date.4 This
determination was based in part on the
EPA’s July 13, 2021 concurrence 5 on a
demonstration provided by CARB that a
wildfire exceptional event contributed
to exceedances at eight monitoring sites
within the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area during August 20–
24, 2020, and exclusion of these data
from our evaluation.6
Because we proposed to determine
that the San Joaquin Valley has attained
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the
December 31, 2020 attainment date, we
also proposed to determine that the
requirement for a post-attainment
milestone would no longer apply in the
San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area
for these NAAQS.7 We explained that
the purpose of the post-attainment
quantitative milestone is to provide the
EPA with the tools necessary to monitor
4 EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design
Value Report (‘‘Design Value Report’’), AMP480,
accessed January 11, 2022. The Design Value Report
excludes measurements with regionally concurred
exceptional event flags. As discussed in our
proposed action, at the time of our proposal, AQS
reports for 24-hour PM2.5 design values were
available only for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
as the pollutant standard. Following our proposed
action, the AQS system was updated to also report
24-hour PM2.5 design values for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard. 40 CFR
part 50 Appendix N specifies the data handling and
design value calculations for both the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
The data values derived using the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard are the
same as those derived for the EPA’s proposed action
using the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as the
pollutant standard except for minor differences in
the 2018 98th percentiles at the Bakersfield-Airport
(Planz) (AQS ID: 06–029–0016) and Madera-Avenue
14 (AQS ID: 06–039–2010) sites, and the 2020
design value at the Madera-Avenue 14 site, due to
data handling differences related to the levels of the
two standards. The 24-hour PM2.5 design values at
all monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area for the 2018–2020 data period
calculated using the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as
the pollutant standard are equal to or less than 65
mg/m3 (i.e., the level of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS). The January 11, 2022 Design Value Report
reflects the AQS system update to report 24-hour
PM2.5 design values for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS as the pollutant standard.
5 Letter dated July 13, 2021, from Elizabeth J.
Adams, Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA
Region IX, to Michael Benjamin, Division Chief, Air
Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB.
6 86 FR 53150, 53183.
7 Id. at 53173.
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
the area’s continued progress toward
attainment in the event the area fails to
attain by the attainment date,8 and that
once an area has attained the NAAQS,
‘‘no further milestones are necessary or
meaningful.’’ 9 Similarly, the section
189(c)(2) requirement to submit a
quantitative milestone report no longer
applies when the area has attained the
standard.10 Accordingly, we proposed
to find that upon a final determination
that the San Joaquin Valley area has
attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
by the attainment date, the postattainment RFP milestone requirement
will no longer apply and CARB would
no longer be required to submit a
quantitative milestone report for the San
Joaquin Valley under 40 CFR 51.1013(b)
for the purposes of the 2023 postattainment milestone year identified in
the Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.11
Similarly, because the EPA does not
believe that it is necessary to
demonstrate conformity using postattainment year budgets in areas that
attain by the attainment date, we
proposed that the requirement for postattainment year (i.e., 2023) motor
vehicle emissions budgets would no
longer apply in the area for the 1997 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS.12
Finally, the EPA proposed to
disapprove the contingency measures
element of the SJV PM2.5 Plan because
of several deficiencies, including that
the contingency provisions of the
District’s Rule 4901 (‘‘Wood Burning
Fireplaces and Wood Burning Heaters’’)
do not address the potential for failures
to meet RFP, to meet a quantitative
milestone, or to submit a quantitative
milestone report.13 In addition, the
contingency measure provisions of Rule
4901 are not structured to achieve any
additional emissions reductions if the
EPA were to find that only certain
counties in the San Joaquin Valley are
violating the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS as of the attainment date, and
thus only provide for reductions under
certain circumstances. However, the
EPA also proposed to find that the
contingency measures requirement for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS will no
longer apply in the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area if we finalize the
determination that the area attained by
the December 31, 2020 attainment date.
Because we proposed to approve the
RFP analysis, the modeled attainment
8 81
FR 58010, 58064 (August 24, 2016).
9 75 FR 13710, 13713 (March 23, 2010).
10 Id.
11 86 FR 53150, 53173.
12 Id. at 53178.
13 Id. at 53175–53176.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
demonstration, and the motor vehicle
emissions budgets, we also proposed to
issue a protective finding under 40 CFR
93.120(a)(3) in the event we finalize the
disapproval of the contingency
measures.14
Please see our September 24, 2021
proposed rule for additional background
and a detailed explanation of the
rationale for our proposed action.
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
The EPA’s proposed action provided
a 30-day public comment period that
ended on October 25, 2021. We received
one set of comments in support of our
proposal.15 These comments are
included in the docket for this action
and do not require a response.
III. Final Action
For the reasons discussed in detail in
our proposed action, the EPA is
finalizing our determination that the
San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area
has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by the December 31, 2020
attainment date, based on complete (or
otherwise deemed sufficient), qualityassured, and certified ambient air
quality monitoring data for the 2018–
2020 monitoring period.16 The EPA is
taking this final action pursuant to CAA
sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2). This
final determination that the San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment area has attained
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS does
not constitute a redesignation of the area
to attainment. Under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E), redesignations of
nonattainment areas to attainment
require states to meet a number of
additional statutory criteria, including
the EPA’s approval of a SIP revision
demonstrating maintenance of the
standard for 10 years after
redesignation. The designation status of
the San Joaquin Valley area will remain
Serious nonattainment for the 1997 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as
the EPA determines that the area meets
the CAA requirements for redesignation
to attainment.
Also, for the reasons discussed in
detail in our proposed action, under
CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is taking
final action to approve in part and
disapprove in part portions of the SJV
PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
14 Id.
15 Comment received October 25, 2021, from the
North American Insulation Manufacturer’s
Association to Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2021–
0261), including attachment.
16 EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design
Value Report, AMP480, accessed January 11, 2022.
The Design Value Report excludes measurements
with regionally concurred exceptional event flags.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4505
NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area as follows:
(1) We are approving the following
elements as meeting the Serious
nonattainment area planning
requirements:
(a) The 2013 base year emissions
inventories as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR
51.1008(b);
(b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR
51.1010(a);
(c) the demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the Plan provides
for attainment as expeditiously as
practicable as meeting the requirements
of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(b) and
40 CFR 51.1011(b);
(d) the RFP demonstration as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections
172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR
51.1012; and
(e) the quantitative milestone
demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and
40 CFR 51.1013;
(2) We are approving the following
elements as meeting the CAA section
189(d) planning requirements:
(a) The 2013 base year emissions
inventories as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR
51.1008(c);
(b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 189(a)(1)(C) 17 and 189(b)(1)(B)
and 40 CFR 51.1010(c);
(c) the demonstration that the Plan
will, at a minimum, achieve an annual
five percent reduction in emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(d) and
40 CFR 51.1010(c);
(d) the demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the Plan provides
for attainment as expeditiously as
practicable as meeting the requirements
of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(d) and
40 CFR 51.1011(b);
(e) the RFP demonstration as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections
172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR
51.1012; and
(f) the quantitative milestone
demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and
40 CFR 51.1013;
17 As discussed in the proposal, a section 189(d)
plan must address any outstanding ‘‘Moderate’’ or
Serious area requirements that have not previously
been approved (86 FR 53150, 53154–53155).
Because we have not previously approved a subpart
4 reasonably available control measure (RACM)
demonstration for the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area, we are also approving the
BACM/BACT demonstration in the SJV PM2.5 Plan
as meeting the subpart 4 RACM/reasonably
available control technology requirement for the
area.
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4506
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
(3) We are approving the following
motor vehicle emissions budgets for
2017 and 2020 as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and
40 CFR part 93, subpart A:
MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY FOR THE 1997 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS
[annual average, tons per day]
2017 (RFP Year)
2020 (Attainment Year)
County
NOX
PM2.5
Fresno ..............................................................................................................
Kern (San Joaquin Valley portion ....................................................................
Kings ................................................................................................................
Madera .............................................................................................................
Merced .............................................................................................................
San Joaquin .....................................................................................................
Stanislaus ........................................................................................................
Tulare ...............................................................................................................
0.9
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.4
PM2.5
28.5
28.0
5.8
5.3
10.7
14.9
11.9
10.8
NOX
0.9
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.4
25.3
23.3
4.8
4.2
8.9
11.9
9.6
8.5
Source: 2018 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix D, Table 3–1. Budgets are rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
We are limiting the duration of our
approval of the budgets to last until new
budgets based on updated planning data
and models have been submitted and
the EPA has found the budgets to be
adequate for conformity purposes. Upon
the effective date of this final rule, the
San Joaquin Valley metropolitan
planning organizations (MPOs) and the
U.S. Department of Transportation will
be required to use the new budgets in
transportation conformity
determinations.18 In addition, for these
conformity determinations, the motor
vehicle emissions from implementation
of the transportation plan must be
projected and compared to the budgets
at the same level of accuracy and using
the same method as the budgets in the
Plan. For example, emissions must be
rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton
per day (tpd).
(4) We are also approving the trading
mechanism in the SJV PM2.5 Plan for the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for use in
transportation conformity analyses by
the San Joaquin Valley MPOs as allowed
for under 40 CFR 93.124(b). The trading
applies only to the following:
• Emissions sources included in the
transportation conformity process;
• Trades using NOX emissions
reductions in excess of those needed to
meet the NOX budget;
• Trades in one direction from NOX
to direct PM2.5; and
• A trading ratio of 2 tpd NOX to 1
tpd PM2.5.19
18 Upon the effective date of this final rule, the
newly-approved budgets will supersede the
corresponding budgets for the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS that the EPA approved at 76 FR 69896
(November 9, 2011).
19 See the 2018 PM
2.5 Plan, Appendix D, D–125
to D–127. Upon the effective date of this final rule,
the new trading ratio will replace the corresponding
existing trading ratio of 9 to 1, NOX to PM2.5, for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
Clear documentation of the
calculations used in the trade must be
included in the conformity analysis; and
(5) We are disapproving the
contingency measures element of the
SJV PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for both the Serious area
and CAA section 189(d) planning
requirements for failing to meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9).
However, based on our finding of
attainment by the applicable attainment
date, we are also finalizing a
determination that the contingency
measures requirement no longer applies
to the San Joaquin Valley area for the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore,
this final action does not trigger
sanctions or FIP clocks.20 In addition,
because we are approving the RFP
analysis, the modeled attainment
demonstration, and the motor vehicle
emissions budgets, we are issuing a
protective finding for transportation
20 As noted in the proposed rule (86 FR 53150,
53152), on December 6, 2018 (83 FR 62720), the
EPA determined that California had failed to submit
a complete section 189(d) attainment plan for the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, among other required
SIP submissions for the San Joaquin Valley, by the
statutory deadlines. Among other things, this
finding triggered the obligation under CAA section
110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a federal
implementation plan (FIP) no later than two years
after the finding, unless the State has submitted,
and the EPA has approved, the required SIP
submission. Our final action on the SJV PM2.5 Plan
for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS terminates our
FIP obligation arising from the December 6, 2018
determination with respect to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in San Joaquin Valley. For all SIP
elements other than the contingency measures, the
FIP obligation is terminated by our approval of the
relevant portions of the SJV PM2.5 Plan SIP as
meeting the applicable requirements. For the
contingency measures element, the FIP obligation is
terminated based on our final determination that
the area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, and that
as a result, the contingency measures requirement
for that NAAQS no longer applies, and thus, there
is no SIP deficiency for a FIP to correct.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
conformity determinations under 40
CFR 93.120(a)(3) in connection with the
final disapproval of the contingency
measures element.
Lastly, based on our final
determination that the San Joaquin
Valley has attained the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2020
attainment date, we are finalizing the
determinations that the requirements for
a post-attainment milestone, a postattainment year quantitative milestone
report, and post-attainment year budgets
no longer apply in the San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment area for the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA because this partial approval and
partial disapproval of SIP revisions and
finding of attainment do not in-and-of
themselves create any new information
collection burdens but simply
disapprove certain state requirements
for inclusion in the SIP.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. This partial approval and
partial disapproval of SIP revisions and
finding of attainment do not in-and-of
themselves create any new requirements
but simply disapprove certain state
requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. This action, in part,
disapproves certain pre-existing
requirements under state or local law
and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to
state, local, or tribal governments, or to
the private sector, result from this
action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175, because the SIP revisions
that the EPA is partially approving and
partially disapproving do not apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because this partial approval and partial
disapproval of SIP revisions and finding
of attainment do not in-and-of
themselves create any new regulations
but simply disapprove certain state
requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. The EPA believes that this
action is not subject to the requirements
of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA lacks the discretionary
authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by March 29, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see CAA
section 307(b)(2)).
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4507
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 24, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA amends chapter I,
title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(537)(ii)(A)(8) and
(c)(537)(ii)(B)(6) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan—in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(537) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) * * *
(8) ‘‘Appendix H, RFP, Quantitative
Milestones, and Contingency, 2018 Plan
for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5
Standards, Appendix H Revised
February 11, 2020’’ (portions pertaining
to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only,
and excluding section H.3
(‘‘Contingency Measures’’)).
(B) * * *
(6) 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and
2012 PM2.5 Standards (‘‘2018 PM2.5
Plan’’), adopted November 15, 2018
(portions pertaining to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS only, and excluding
Chapter 6 (‘‘Demonstration of Federal
Requirements for 2006 PM2.5
Standards’’), Chapter 7 (‘‘Demonstration
of Federal Requirements for 2012 PM2.5
Standards’’), and Appendix H, section
H.3 (‘‘Contingency Measures’’)).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 52.237 is amended by
adding paragraph (a)(12) to read as
follows:
§ 52.237
Part D disapproval.
(a) * * *
(12) The contingency measures
portion of the 2018 Plan for the 1997,
2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards (‘‘2018
PM2.5 Plan’’), adopted November 15,
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
4508
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
2018, for San Joaquin Valley with
respect to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Section 52.244 is amended by
adding paragraph (f)(3) to read as
follows:
§ 52.244
Motor vehicle emissions budgets.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(3) San Joaquin Valley, for the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only (years 2017
and 2020 budgets only), approved
February 28, 2022.
■ 5. Section 52.247 is amended by
adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
§ 52.247 Control Strategy and regulations:
Fine Particle Matter.
*
*
*
*
*
(p) Determination of Attainment:
Effective February 28, 2022, the EPA has
determined that, based on 2018 to 2020
ambient air quality data, the San
Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment
area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date of December 31, 2020. Therefore,
the EPA has met the requirement
pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1) and
188(b)(2) to determine whether the area
attained the standard. The EPA has also
determined that, based on the
determination of attainment by the
applicable attainment date, the
requirement of CAA section 172(c)(9) to
provide for contingency measures no
longer applies to the San Joaquin Valley
area for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2022–01728 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0391; FRL–8693–02–
R7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri
Redesignation Request and
Associated Maintenance Plan for the
Jefferson County 2010 SO2 1-Hour
NAAQS Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On December 27, 2017, the
State of Missouri submitted a request for
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to redesignate the Jefferson
County, Missouri, 2010 1-hour sulfur
dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS)
nonattainment area to attainment and to
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Jan 27, 2022
Jkt 256001
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision containing a maintenance
plan for the area. The State provided
supplemental information on: May 15,
2018; February 7, 2019; February 25,
2019; and April 9, 2021. In response to
these submittals, the EPA is taking the
following final actions: Approve the
State’s plan for maintaining attainment
of the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary
standard in the area; and approve the
State’s request to redesignate the
Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment
area to attainment for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 primary standard.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
February 28, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0391. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ashley Keas, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality
Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at
(913) 551–7629 or by email at
keas.ashley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What is being addressed in this document?
II. The EPA’s Responses to Comments
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What are the actions the EPA is taking?
V. Environmental Justice Concerns
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being addressed in this
document?
On December 27, 2017, the State
submitted a request for redesignation of
the Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment
area to attainment and a SIP revision
containing a 10-year maintenance plan
for the area. On May 15, 2018, the State
submitted a clarifying letter that
Appendix A (containing the emissions
inventory for the area) and Appendix B
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(containing a Consent Agreement
entered between Missouri and Ameren
sources in the area) of the SIP submittal
should be considered part of the SIP
revision request. On February 7, 2019,
and February 25, 2019, the State
submitted supplemental modeling
information to the EPA. On April 9,
2021, the State submitted an addendum
to the Consent Agreement which
contains the emissions limits and
monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements needed to
determine compliance with the
emissions limits for the covered sources.
The EPA’s proposal at 86 FR 34177
[June 29, 2021] discusses the EPA’s
review of the redesignation request, the
maintenance plan (including Consent
Agreement and addendum), and the
supplemental information and provides
support for the EPA’s proposed
approval of the request to redesignate
the area to attainment and for proposed
approval of the 10-year maintenance
plan. Additional analysis of the
redesignation request, 10-year
maintenance plan, Consent Agreement
and addendum, and supplemental
modeling information is provided in a
Technical Support Document (TSD)
included in this docket. The public
comment period on the EPA’s proposed
rule opened on June 29, 2021, the date
of its publication in the Federal
Register, and closed on July 29, 2021.
During this period, the EPA received
one comment. The EPA additionally
received a request to extend the
comment period due to the technical
support document being added to the
docket partway through the comment
period. Therefore, the EPA reopened the
comment period on August 17, 2021,
and closed on September 16, 2021 (86
FR 45950). During this second comment
period, the EPA received one additional
comment. Both comments are addressed
in section II.
II. The EPA’s Responses to Comments
Comment 1: On July 29, 2021, the
EPA received a comment from Ameren
Missouri. The comment was largely
supportive of the EPA’s proposed
redesignation of the Jefferson County
area. Ameren also identified minor
clarifications and corrections needed in
the TSD. Specifically, Ameren noted
that the TSD incorrectly stated that
meteorological data was from the
Weaver monitor when in fact the
Weaver monitor does not collect
meteorological data.
Response 1: The EPA updated this
reference to the Johnson Tall Tower, the
source of the meteorological data
underlying the pollution rose on page
E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM
28JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4503-4508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01728]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0261; FRL-8969-02-R9]
Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality
Implementation Plans and Determination of Attainment by the Attainment
Date; California; San Joaquin Valley Serious Area and Section 189(d)
Plan for Attainment of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve in part and disapprove in part portions of state
implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by California to address
Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for the 1997 24-hour fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or ``standards'') in the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5
nonattainment area. Specifically, the EPA is approving all but the
contingency measures element of the submitted SIP revisions as meeting
all applicable ``Serious'' area and CAA section 189(d) requirements for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is disapproving the
contingency measures element. The EPA is also
[[Page 4504]]
finalizing a determination that the San Joaquin Valley air quality
planning area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by
the applicable attainment date. This determination is based on
sufficient, quality-assured, and certified data for 2018-2020. Based on
our finding that the San Joaquin Valley area has attained the 1997 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, we are
also finalizing a determination that the requirement for contingency
measures will no longer apply to the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment
area for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Lastly, the EPA is
issuing a protective finding for transportation conformity
determinations for the disapproval of the contingency measures element.
DATES: This rule is effective on February 28, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0261. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance
in a language other than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you,
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office
(ARD-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3877, or by email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Proposed Rule
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Proposed Rule
On September 24, 2021, the EPA proposed to approve in part and
disapprove in part portions of SIP revisions submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) to meet CAA requirements for the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley
PM2.5 nonattainment area.\1\ The San Joaquin Valley is
classified as a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and is also subject to CAA section 189(d)
requirements because of the failure of the area to attain the 1997 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the area's original Serious area
attainment date (i.e., December 31, 2015). The EPA's determination that
the area failed to attain the original December 31, 2015 attainment
date triggered the requirement for the state to submit the SIP
revisions on which the EPA is taking final action in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 86 FR 53150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP revisions on which we proposed action are those portions of
the ``2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5
Standards'' (``2018 PM2.5 Plan'') \2\ and the ``San Joaquin
Valley Supplement to the 2016 State Strategy for the State
Implementation Plan'' (``Valley State SIP Strategy'') \3\ that pertain
to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. CARB submitted the 2018
PM2.5 Plan and Valley State SIP Strategy to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP on May 10, 2019. We refer to the
portions of these two SIP submissions that pertain to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS collectively as the ``SJV PM2.5
Plan'' or ``Plan.'' The SJV PM2.5 Plan addresses the Serious
area and CAA section 189(d) attainment plan requirements for the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley, including the
demonstration that the area would attain those NAAQS by December 31,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The 2018 PM2.5 Plan was adopted by the San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District on November
15, 2018, and by CARB on January 24, 2019. The 2018 PM2.5
Plan includes a revised version of Appendix H submitted by CARB as a
technical correction on February 11, 2020.
\3\ The Valley State SIP Strategy was adopted by CARB on October
25, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA proposed to approve the 2013 base year emissions
inventories, the precursor demonstration, the best available control
measures/best available control technology (BACM/BACT) demonstration,
the five percent annual emissions reduction demonstration, the
attainment demonstration, the reasonable further progress (RFP)
demonstration, and the quantitative milestones demonstration in the SJV
PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Serious nonattainment area and CAA
section 189(d) planning requirements for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. We also proposed to approve the motor vehicle
emissions budgets for 2017 and 2020 and the inter-pollutant trading
mechanism provided for use in transportation conformity analyses.
Based on complete (or otherwise deemed sufficient), quality-
assured, and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the
2018-2020 monitoring period, the EPA also proposed to determine that
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area attained the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2020 attainment date.\4\
This determination was based in part on the EPA's July 13, 2021
concurrence \5\ on a demonstration provided by CARB that a wildfire
exceptional event contributed to exceedances at eight monitoring sites
within the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area during August 20-24,
2020, and exclusion of these data from our evaluation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report
(``Design Value Report''), AMP480, accessed January 11, 2022. The
Design Value Report excludes measurements with regionally concurred
exceptional event flags. As discussed in our proposed action, at the
time of our proposal, AQS reports for 24-hour PM2.5
design values were available only for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard. Following our
proposed action, the AQS system was updated to also report 24-hour
PM2.5 design values for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS as the pollutant standard. 40 CFR part 50 Appendix N specifies
the data handling and design value calculations for both the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. The data values derived using the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard are the same as
those derived for the EPA's proposed action using the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard except for minor
differences in the 2018 98th percentiles at the Bakersfield-Airport
(Planz) (AQS ID: 06-029-0016) and Madera-Avenue 14 (AQS ID: 06-039-
2010) sites, and the 2020 design value at the Madera-Avenue 14 site,
due to data handling differences related to the levels of the two
standards. The 24-hour PM2.5 design values at all
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for
the 2018-2020 data period calculated using the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard are equal to or
less than 65 [micro]g/m\3\ (i.e., the level of the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS). The January 11, 2022 Design Value Report
reflects the AQS system update to report 24-hour PM2.5
design values for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as the
pollutant standard.
\5\ Letter dated July 13, 2021, from Elizabeth J. Adams,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Michael
Benjamin, Division Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division,
CARB.
\6\ 86 FR 53150, 53183.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because we proposed to determine that the San Joaquin Valley has
attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31,
2020 attainment date, we also proposed to determine that the
requirement for a post-attainment milestone would no longer apply in
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for these NAAQS.\7\ We
explained that the purpose of the post-attainment quantitative
milestone is to provide the EPA with the tools necessary to monitor
[[Page 4505]]
the area's continued progress toward attainment in the event the area
fails to attain by the attainment date,\8\ and that once an area has
attained the NAAQS, ``no further milestones are necessary or
meaningful.'' \9\ Similarly, the section 189(c)(2) requirement to
submit a quantitative milestone report no longer applies when the area
has attained the standard.\10\ Accordingly, we proposed to find that
upon a final determination that the San Joaquin Valley area has
attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the attainment
date, the post-attainment RFP milestone requirement will no longer
apply and CARB would no longer be required to submit a quantitative
milestone report for the San Joaquin Valley under 40 CFR 51.1013(b) for
the purposes of the 2023 post-attainment milestone year identified in
the Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Id. at 53173.
\8\ 81 FR 58010, 58064 (August 24, 2016).
\9\ 75 FR 13710, 13713 (March 23, 2010).
\10\ Id.
\11\ 86 FR 53150, 53173.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, because the EPA does not believe that it is necessary to
demonstrate conformity using post-attainment year budgets in areas that
attain by the attainment date, we proposed that the requirement for
post-attainment year (i.e., 2023) motor vehicle emissions budgets would
no longer apply in the area for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id. at 53178.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the EPA proposed to disapprove the contingency measures
element of the SJV PM2.5 Plan because of several
deficiencies, including that the contingency provisions of the
District's Rule 4901 (``Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning
Heaters'') do not address the potential for failures to meet RFP, to
meet a quantitative milestone, or to submit a quantitative milestone
report.\13\ In addition, the contingency measure provisions of Rule
4901 are not structured to achieve any additional emissions reductions
if the EPA were to find that only certain counties in the San Joaquin
Valley are violating the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as of the
attainment date, and thus only provide for reductions under certain
circumstances. However, the EPA also proposed to find that the
contingency measures requirement for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS will no longer apply in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area
if we finalize the determination that the area attained by the December
31, 2020 attainment date. Because we proposed to approve the RFP
analysis, the modeled attainment demonstration, and the motor vehicle
emissions budgets, we also proposed to issue a protective finding under
40 CFR 93.120(a)(3) in the event we finalize the disapproval of the
contingency measures.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. at 53175-53176.
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please see our September 24, 2021 proposed rule for additional
background and a detailed explanation of the rationale for our proposed
action.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on October 25, 2021. We received one set of comments in
support of our proposal.\15\ These comments are included in the docket
for this action and do not require a response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Comment received October 25, 2021, from the North American
Insulation Manufacturer's Association to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2021-0261), including attachment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Final Action
For the reasons discussed in detail in our proposed action, the EPA
is finalizing our determination that the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
by the December 31, 2020 attainment date, based on complete (or
otherwise deemed sufficient), quality-assured, and certified ambient
air quality monitoring data for the 2018-2020 monitoring period.\16\
The EPA is taking this final action pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1)
and 188(b)(2). This final determination that the San Joaquin Valley
nonattainment area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
does not constitute a redesignation of the area to attainment. Under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), redesignations of nonattainment areas to
attainment require states to meet a number of additional statutory
criteria, including the EPA's approval of a SIP revision demonstrating
maintenance of the standard for 10 years after redesignation. The
designation status of the San Joaquin Valley area will remain Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS until such
time as the EPA determines that the area meets the CAA requirements for
redesignation to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report,
AMP480, accessed January 11, 2022. The Design Value Report excludes
measurements with regionally concurred exceptional event flags.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, for the reasons discussed in detail in our proposed action,
under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is taking final action to approve
in part and disapprove in part portions of the SJV PM2.5
Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment area as follows:
(1) We are approving the following elements as meeting the Serious
nonattainment area planning requirements:
(a) The 2013 base year emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(b);
(b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a);
(c) the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the
Plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(b) and 40 CFR
51.1011(b);
(d) the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR 51.1012; and
(e) the quantitative milestone demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013;
(2) We are approving the following elements as meeting the CAA
section 189(d) planning requirements:
(a) The 2013 base year emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(c);
(b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 189(a)(1)(C) \17\ and 189(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1010(c);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ As discussed in the proposal, a section 189(d) plan must
address any outstanding ``Moderate'' or Serious area requirements
that have not previously been approved (86 FR 53150, 53154-53155).
Because we have not previously approved a subpart 4 reasonably
available control measure (RACM) demonstration for the San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment area, we are also approving the BACM/BACT
demonstration in the SJV PM2.5 Plan as meeting the
subpart 4 RACM/reasonably available control technology requirement
for the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) the demonstration that the Plan will, at a minimum, achieve an
annual five percent reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOX) as meeting the requirements of CAA section 189(d) and
40 CFR 51.1010(c);
(d) the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the
Plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable as meeting
the requirements of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(d) and 40 CFR
51.1011(b);
(e) the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR 51.1012; and
(f) the quantitative milestone demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013;
[[Page 4506]]
(3) We are approving the following motor vehicle emissions budgets
for 2017 and 2020 as meeting the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and
40 CFR part 93, subpart A:
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
[annual average, tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 (RFP Year) 2020 (Attainment Year)
County ---------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX PM2.5 NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno.......................................... 0.9 28.5 0.9 25.3
Kern (San Joaquin Valley portion................ 0.8 28.0 0.8 23.3
Kings........................................... 0.2 5.8 0.2 4.8
Madera.......................................... 0.2 5.3 0.2 4.2
Merced.......................................... 0.3 10.7 0.3 8.9
San Joaquin..................................... 0.7 14.9 0.6 11.9
Stanislaus...................................... 0.4 11.9 0.4 9.6
Tulare.......................................... 0.4 10.8 0.4 8.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2018 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix D, Table 3-1. Budgets are rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton.
We are limiting the duration of our approval of the budgets to last
until new budgets based on updated planning data and models have been
submitted and the EPA has found the budgets to be adequate for
conformity purposes. Upon the effective date of this final rule, the
San Joaquin Valley metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and the
U.S. Department of Transportation will be required to use the new
budgets in transportation conformity determinations.\18\ In addition,
for these conformity determinations, the motor vehicle emissions from
implementation of the transportation plan must be projected and
compared to the budgets at the same level of accuracy and using the
same method as the budgets in the Plan. For example, emissions must be
rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton per day (tpd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Upon the effective date of this final rule, the newly-
approved budgets will supersede the corresponding budgets for the
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS that the EPA approved at 76 FR 69896
(November 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) We are also approving the trading mechanism in the SJV
PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for
use in transportation conformity analyses by the San Joaquin Valley
MPOs as allowed for under 40 CFR 93.124(b). The trading applies only to
the following:
Emissions sources included in the transportation
conformity process;
Trades using NOX emissions reductions in excess
of those needed to meet the NOX budget;
Trades in one direction from NOX to direct
PM2.5; and
A trading ratio of 2 tpd NOX to 1 tpd
PM2.5.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See the 2018 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix D, D-125 to D-
127. Upon the effective date of this final rule, the new trading
ratio will replace the corresponding existing trading ratio of 9 to
1, NOX to PM2.5, for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear documentation of the calculations used in the trade must be
included in the conformity analysis; and
(5) We are disapproving the contingency measures element of the SJV
PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for
both the Serious area and CAA section 189(d) planning requirements for
failing to meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9). However,
based on our finding of attainment by the applicable attainment date,
we are also finalizing a determination that the contingency measures
requirement no longer applies to the San Joaquin Valley area for the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, this final action does
not trigger sanctions or FIP clocks.\20\ In addition, because we are
approving the RFP analysis, the modeled attainment demonstration, and
the motor vehicle emissions budgets, we are issuing a protective
finding for transportation conformity determinations under 40 CFR
93.120(a)(3) in connection with the final disapproval of the
contingency measures element.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ As noted in the proposed rule (86 FR 53150, 53152), on
December 6, 2018 (83 FR 62720), the EPA determined that California
had failed to submit a complete section 189(d) attainment plan for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, among other required SIP
submissions for the San Joaquin Valley, by the statutory deadlines.
Among other things, this finding triggered the obligation under CAA
section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a federal implementation
plan (FIP) no later than two years after the finding, unless the
State has submitted, and the EPA has approved, the required SIP
submission. Our final action on the SJV PM2.5 Plan for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS terminates our FIP
obligation arising from the December 6, 2018 determination with
respect to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in San Joaquin
Valley. For all SIP elements other than the contingency measures,
the FIP obligation is terminated by our approval of the relevant
portions of the SJV PM2.5 Plan SIP as meeting the
applicable requirements. For the contingency measures element, the
FIP obligation is terminated based on our final determination that
the area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date, and that as a result, the contingency
measures requirement for that NAAQS no longer applies, and thus,
there is no SIP deficiency for a FIP to correct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, based on our final determination that the San Joaquin
Valley has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the
December 31, 2020 attainment date, we are finalizing the determinations
that the requirements for a post-attainment milestone, a post-
attainment year quantitative milestone report, and post-attainment year
budgets no longer apply in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area
for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this partial approval and partial disapproval of SIP
revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of themselves create
any new information collection burdens but simply disapprove certain
state requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities
[[Page 4507]]
under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small
entities. This partial approval and partial disapproval of SIP
revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of themselves create
any new requirements but simply disapprove certain state requirements
for inclusion in the SIP.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action, in part, disapproves certain pre-
existing requirements under state or local law and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP revisions that the EPA is
partially approving and partially disapproving do not apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because this partial approval and partial
disapproval of SIP revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of
themselves create any new regulations but simply disapprove certain
state requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 29, 2022. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see CAA section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 24, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends chapter I,
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(537)(ii)(A)(8)
and (c)(537)(ii)(B)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(537) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) * * *
(8) ``Appendix H, RFP, Quantitative Milestones, and Contingency,
2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards,
Appendix H Revised February 11, 2020'' (portions pertaining to the 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only, and excluding section H.3
(``Contingency Measures'')).
(B) * * *
(6) 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5
Standards (``2018 PM2.5 Plan''), adopted November 15, 2018
(portions pertaining to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only,
and excluding Chapter 6 (``Demonstration of Federal Requirements for
2006 PM2.5 Standards''), Chapter 7 (``Demonstration of
Federal Requirements for 2012 PM2.5 Standards''), and
Appendix H, section H.3 (``Contingency Measures'')).
* * * * *
0
3. Section 52.237 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(12) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.237 Part D disapproval.
(a) * * *
(12) The contingency measures portion of the 2018 Plan for the
1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards (``2018
PM2.5 Plan''), adopted November 15,
[[Page 4508]]
2018, for San Joaquin Valley with respect to the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 52.244 is amended by adding paragraph (f)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.244 Motor vehicle emissions budgets.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) San Joaquin Valley, for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
only (years 2017 and 2020 budgets only), approved February 28, 2022.
0
5. Section 52.247 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.247 Control Strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.
* * * * *
(p) Determination of Attainment: Effective February 28, 2022, the
EPA has determined that, based on 2018 to 2020 ambient air quality
data, the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area has
attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of December 31, 2020. Therefore, the EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) to
determine whether the area attained the standard. The EPA has also
determined that, based on the determination of attainment by the
applicable attainment date, the requirement of CAA section 172(c)(9) to
provide for contingency measures no longer applies to the San Joaquin
Valley area for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2022-01728 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
