Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; Coachella Valley; Extreme Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards, 26817-26835 [2024-08121]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS.
The TSD has more information on our
evaluation.
C. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve the requested rescission of the
rules listed in Table 1 above, and
subsequent replacement of SIPapproved rules, because they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We will accept
comments from the public on this
proposal until May 16, 2024. If we take
final action to approve the rescission,
and/or replacement, of the submitted
rules, our final action will remove the
rescinded rules from the federally
enforceable SIP, and replace these rules
in the federally enforceable SIP as
described.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Maricopa County Air Quality
Department, Rule 320, Odors and
Gaseous Air Contaminants, sections 306
and 307, revised on July 2, 2003, which
regulate emissions of SO2 from fossil
fuel fired steam generators. In addition,
the EPA is proposing to rescind Rule 22,
Rule 28, Rule 32 sections H and K, Rule
41 sections A and B, Rule 42, and Rule
74 section C from the MCAQD SIP
without replacement because the rules
either have already been superseded in
the SIP by requirements that are at least
as stringent or are requirements that do
not address any particular CAA
requirements, do not include definitions
that are not otherwise defined
elsewhere, do not include provisions
that are necessary to implement or
protect any of the NAAQS and do not
fulfill RACT requirements. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
materials available through https://
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
IV. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• 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 subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it proposes to approve a state
program;
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• 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.
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26817
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA
further defines the term fair treatment to
mean that ‘‘no group of people should
bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The State did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. The EPA did not perform an
EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in
this action. Consideration of EJ is not
required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of
Executive Order 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of
color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: April 9, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024–07954 Filed 4–15–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2023–0448; FRL–11677–
01–R9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
California; Coachella Valley; Extreme
Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
26818
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) in the
Riverside County (Coachella Valley), CA
nonattainment area (‘‘Coachella
Valley’’). These SIP revisions address
the ‘‘Extreme’’ nonattainment area
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards, including the requirements
for the attainment demonstration,
reasonable further progress
demonstration, and reasonably available
control measures demonstration, among
others.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2023–0448 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.
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. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with a
disability 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: Tom
Kelly, Geographic Strategies and
Modeling Section (AIR–2–2), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, (415) 972–3856,
kelly.thomasp@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the
Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Background on the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
B. The Coachella Valley 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for
Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs
III. CARB’s SIP Submittals To Address the
Extreme Requirements for the 1997 8Hour Ozone Standards in the Coachella
Valley
A. CARB’s SIP Submittals
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures
Demonstration and Adopted Control
Strategy
C. Attainment Demonstration
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further
Progress Demonstrations
E. Vehicle Miles Travelled Offset
Demonstration
F. Clean Fuels or Advanced Control
Technology for Boilers
G. Other CAA Requirements
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. The EPA’s Proposed Action and Public
Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
and the Coachella Valley
Nonattainment Area
A. Background on the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standards
Ground-level ozone is formed when
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight.1 These two
pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of
pollution sources, including on- and offroad motor vehicles and engines, power
plants and industrial facilities, and
smaller area sources such as lawn and
garden equipment and paints.
Health effects associated with
exposure to ground-level ozone include:
reduced lung function, making it more
difficult for people to breathe as deeply
and vigorously as normal; irritated
airways, causing coughing, sore or
scratchy throat, pain when taking a deep
breath and shortness of breath;
increased frequency of asthma attacks;
inflammation of and damage to the
lining of the lung; increased
susceptibility to respiratory infection;
and aggravation of chronic lung diseases
such as asthma, emphysema, and
bronchitis. Ozone may continue to
cause lung damage even when the
symptoms have disappeared and
1 The State of California uses the term Reactive
Organic Gases (ROG) rather than VOC 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 simplicity, we refer
to this set of gases as VOC.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
breathing ozone may contribute to
premature death, especially in people
with heart and lung disease.2
In 1979, under section 109 of the
Clean Air Act (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 8-hour ozone standards’’).4 The
EPA set the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards based on scientific evidence
demonstrating that ozone causes
adverse health effects at lower
concentrations and over longer periods
of time than was understood when the
previous 1-hour ozone standards were
set. The EPA determined that the 1997
8-hour standards would be more
protective of human health, especially
for children and adults who are active
outdoors, and individuals with a preexisting respiratory disease, such as
asthma. The 8-hour ozone standards
were further strengthened in 2008 and
2015.5 Although the 1979 1-hour ozone
standards and the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards have subsequently been
revoked following the promulgation of
more stringent ozone standards, certain
requirements that had applied under the
revoked standards continue to apply
under the anti-backsliding provisions of
CAA section 172(e), including an
approved attainment plan.6
B. The Coachella Valley 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
the CAA to designate areas throughout
the nation as attaining or not attaining
the standards. Effective June 15, 2004,
the EPA designated nonattainment areas
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards.7
The designations and classifications for
2 EPA, ‘‘Fact Sheet, Final Revisions to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone,’’ March 2008.
3 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
4 62 FR 38856.
5 In 2008, the EPA revised and strengthened the
NAAQS for ozone by setting the acceptable level of
ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged
over an 8-hour period. 73 FR 16436 (March 27,
2008). In 2015, the EPA further tightened the 8-hour
ozone standards to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015). The EPA has approved most
elements of the 2008 ozone attainment plan for the
Coachella Valley. 85 FR 57714 (September 16,
2020). The EPA has yet to act on the Coachella
Valley attainment plan for the 2015 ozone NAAQS,
submitted electronically on February 23, 2023. This
action applies only to the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards and does not address requirements for the
2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone standards.
6 80 FR 12264, 12296 (March 6, 2015).
7 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004).
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for
California areas are codified at 40 CFR
81.305. In a rule governing certain facets
of implementation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards (the ‘‘Phase 1 Rule’’),
the EPA classified the Coachella Valley
as ‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone standards, with an
attainment date no later than June 15,
2013.8 On November 28, 2007, the
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
requested that the EPA reclassify the
Coachella Valley 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area from Serious to
‘‘Severe-15.’’ The EPA granted the
reclassification, effective June 4, 2010,
with an attainment date of not later than
June 15, 2019.9 On June 11, 2019, CARB
requested another reclassification for
the Coachella Valley, from Severe-15 to
‘‘Extreme’’ nonattainment, which the
EPA granted in a final rule published
July 10, 2019.10 This reclassification to
Extreme applied only to the portions of
the Coachella Valley subject to state
jurisdiction. At this time, areas of Indian
country within the nonattainment area
remain classified as Severe-15 for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards.11 On
January 15, 2020, we published a final
rule setting a deadline of February 20,
2021, for the state to submit a SIP
revision addressing the Extreme
requirements of CAA section 182(e) and
the revised title V and new source
review rules for the Coachella Valley.12
The EPA previously approved many
elements of the Coachella Valley’s
Severe attainment plan in a final rule
dated June 12, 2017,13 including the
reasonably available control measure
(RACM) demonstration as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(17); the rate of progress
(ROP) and reasonable further progress
(RFP) demonstrations as meeting the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2)
and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4); the
attainment demonstration as meeting
the requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1)
and 51.1100(o)(12); and the
demonstration that the SIP submittal
provides for transportation control
strategies and measures sufficient to
offset any growth in emissions from
growth in vehicle miles travelled (VMT)
or the number of vehicle trips, and to
provide for RFP and attainment, as
8 Id.
at 23885 and 23886.
FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
10 84 FR 32841 (July 10, 2019).
11 Id.; see also 40 CFR 81.305.
12 85 FR 2311 (January 15, 2020). See also
proposal at 84 FR 44801 (August 27, 2019).
13 82 FR 26854.
9 75
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). The
EPA did not act on the contingency
measures submitted with the Severe-15
attainment plan, which were
subsequently withdrawn by CARB, and
we did not act on the motor vehicle
emissions budgets, because the
associated transportation conformity
demonstration is not required for a
revoked NAAQS. The EPA also
approved the Enhanced motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program for the Coachella Valley in a
final rule published on July 1, 2010.14
The Coachella Valley area is located
within Riverside County.15 The
Coachella Valley is under the
jurisdiction of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD
or ‘‘District’’), which also oversees air
quality in the upwind South Coast Air
Basin. The District and CARB are
responsible for adopting and submitting
plans to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards for nonattainment areas in
their jurisdiction.
Ground level ozone in the Coachella
Valley ‘‘is both directly transported
from the [South Coast Air Basin] and
formed photochemically from
precursors emitted upwind and within
the Coachella Valley.’’ 16 The South
Coast Air Basin is home to a much
larger population than Coachella Valley
and, based on inventory data from 2018,
emissions of NOX and VOC in the South
Coast Air Basin are more than 20 times
larger than those of Coachella Valley.17
Therefore, attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards in Coachella Valley is
heavily dependent on upwind
reductions in the South Coast Air Basin.
The largest sources of precursors are at
the coastal and central portions of South
Coast Air Basin. The area’s prevailing
winds transport ozone precursors
inland, forming ozone along the way.
Maximum ozone concentrations occur
‘‘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.’’ 18 As
pollution is further transported through
the San Gorgonio Pass into the
Coachella Valley, ozone concentrations
typically decrease from dilution with
14 75
FR 38023.
a precise description of the geographic
boundaries of the area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
16 SCAQMD, ‘‘Final Coachella Valley Extreme
Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard,’’
dated December 2020, (‘‘Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan’’), p. 2–1.
17 Id. at 3–13.
18 Id. at 2–1.
15 For
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26819
cleaner air, but ozone standards are still
exceeded.
Air quality in the Coachella Valley
has steadily improved in recent years.
Design values have declined from 0.108
ppm in 2003 to 0.087 ppm in 2022.19
Design values are used to designate and
classify nonattainment areas, as well as
to assess progress towards meeting the
air quality standards.20
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements
for Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs
States must implement the 1997 8hour ozone standards under Title 1, Part
D of the CAA, which includes section
172, ‘‘Nonattainment plan provisions,’’
and subpart 2, ‘‘Additional Provisions
for Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’
(sections 181–185).
To assist states in developing effective
plans to address ozone nonattainment,
the EPA issued an implementation rule
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
(‘‘1997 Ozone Implementation Rule’’).
This rule was finalized in two phases.
The first phase of the rule addressed
classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards; applicable attainment dates
for the various classifications; the
timing of emissions reductions needed
for attainment; and identified applicable
requirements, such as clean fuels for
boilers.21 The second phase addressed
SIP submittal dates and the
requirements for reasonably available
control technology (RACT) and RACM,
RFP, modeling and attainment
demonstrations, contingency measures,
and new source review.22 The rule was
codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart X.
The EPA announced the revocation of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards and
the anti-backsliding requirements that
apply upon revocation in a rulemaking
that established final implementation
rules for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.23 Under these anti-backsliding
requirements, areas that were
designated as nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards at the time
the standards were revoked continue to
be subject to certain SIP requirements
that had previously applied based on
area classifications for the standards.24
Thus, although the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards have been revoked, the
Coachella Valley remains subject to
19 EPA, Design Values Report for the Joshua Tree
National Monument, Indio, and Palm Springs
monitors for 2021, 2021, and 2022, March 8, 2023,
and contained in the docket for this proposed
action.
20 For more information about ozone design
values, see 40 CFR 50, Appendix I.
21 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
22 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005).
23 80 FR 12264.
24 Id. at 12296; 40 CFR 51.1105 and 51.1100(o).
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26820
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
many requirements for these standards
as applicable to ‘‘Extreme’’
nonattainment areas.
We discuss the CAA and regulatory
requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment plans in more detail in
the following section of this proposed
rulemaking.
III. CARB’s SIP Submittals To Address
the Extreme Requirements for the 1997
8-Hour Ozone Standards in the
Coachella Valley
A. CARB’s SIP Submittals
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1. The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
On December 29, 2020, CARB
submitted the ‘‘Final Coachella Valley
Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standard,’’ dated December 2020
(‘‘Coachella Valley Ozone Plan’’ or
‘‘Plan’’), to the EPA as a revision to the
California SIP.25 The Plan addresses
many of the Extreme nonattainment area
requirements for the Coachella Valley
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards.
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
includes the District’s resolution of
approval for the Plan (District Board
Resolution 20–22) and the executive
order commemorating CARB’s adoption
of the Plan as a revision to the California
SIP (Executive Order S–20–34).26 The
Plan addresses the requirements for
emissions inventory; RACM
demonstration and adopted control
strategy; attainment demonstration; ROP
and RFP demonstrations; and clean
fuels for boilers.
The Plan is organized into an
executive summary, seven sections, and
three appendices. Section 1,
‘‘Introduction,’’ identifies the
nonattainment area and the
nonattainment status for all EPA ozone
standards, including the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards; provides a history of
air quality planning for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards; and explains the
purpose of the Plan. Section 2, ‘‘Air
Quality Trends,’’ describes the
formation of ground-level ozone
generally and specific factors that
contribute to ozone formation in the
Coachella Valley, and provides historic
monitoring data and related discussion.
Section 3, ‘‘Base Year and Future Year
Emissions,’’ describes the methodology
used for the area’s emissions
inventories, citing to the ‘‘Final 2016
25 Letter dated December 28, 2020, from Richard
W. Corey, CARB, to John W. Busterud, EPA,
Subject: ‘‘Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard’’ (submitted
electronically December 29, 2020).
26 SCAQMD Board Resolution 20–22, December
4, 2020; Executive Order S–20–34, ‘‘Coachella
Extreme Ozone Plan SIP Submittal,’’ December 28,
2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
Air Quality Management Plan’’ (‘‘2016
AQMP’’) 27 where appropriate, and
discusses the modeled inventories in
detail. Section 4, ‘‘Control Strategy,’’
describes District and CARB rules that
will achieve the emissions reductions
relied upon in the Plan. Section 5,
‘‘Future Air Quality,’’ describes the
modeling approach, including inputs,
assumptions, methodology, and weight
of evidence analysis (WOE). Section 6,
‘‘Other Clean Air Act Requirements’’
addresses various Extreme area
requirements, including for RFP, RACT,
RACM, contingency measures, offsetting
of increases in VMT, NSR requirements,
use of clean fuels or advanced control
technology for boilers, and traffic
control measures during heavy traffic
hours. Sections 7 through 9 address
various procedural requirements,
including compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act,
and notice and comment procedures.
The Plan includes three supporting
appendices, which describe the
emissions inventories and existing
District and CARB rules and regulations
relied on in the Plan.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Offset
Demonstration
On March 18, 2021,28 CARB
submitted the ‘‘VMT Offset
Demonstration.’’ 29 The VMT Offset
Demonstration is intended to show
compliance with the requirement at
CAA section 182(d)(1) for
nonattainment areas classified Severe or
Extreme to adopt sufficient
transportation control strategies (TCSs)
and transportation control measures
(TCMs) to offset any growth in VMT.
The VMT Offset Demonstration
contains an Executive Summary,
Introduction, Methodology, Staff
Recommendations, and appendices. The
appendices contain the following
sections: ‘‘Sensitivity Test to Estimate
Emissions for the 2023 Attainment Year
with Motor Vehicle Control Program
Frozen at 2002;’’ ‘‘EMFAC2014
Analysis;’’ 30 ‘‘EMFAC2011 Analysis;’’ 31
and ‘‘Summary.’’
27 SCAQMD, ‘‘Final 2016 Air Quality
Management Plan,’’ dated March 2017, submitted
electronically by CARB to the EPA on April 27,
2017, and approved by the EPA on September 16,
2020 (85 FR 57714). The 2016 AQMP includes a
Coachella Valley attainment plan for the 2008
ozone standards.
28 Letter dated March 15, 2021, from Richard W.
Corey, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, EPA (submitted
electronically March 18, 2021).
29 CARB, ‘‘Staff Report, 2020 Coachella Valley
Vehicle Miles Traveled Emissions Offset
Demonstration,’’ January 22, 2021.
30 EMFAC2014 is the 2014 version of CARB’s
Emissions Factor model.
31 EMFAC2011 is the 2011 version of CARB’s
Emissions Factor model.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The VMT Offset Demonstration
includes a base year emissions estimate
and three different estimates for the
2023 attainment year. One estimate has
2023 on-road vehicle emissions controls
frozen as the requirements existed in
2002. One estimate shows 2023
emissions freezing the VMT at the levels
from 2002. The final estimate reflects
expected emissions for 2023 based on
the submitted control strategy, which, as
described further in Section IV.E of this
document, must be less than both
previous estimates for 2023 for an
adequate VMT offset demonstration.
As the VMT Offset Demonstration
explains, several post-2002 emissions
control measures are factored into
EMFAC2017 (the latest CARB model for
on-road emissions at the time the
demonstration was prepared) and
cannot be removed. To correct this, the
VMT Offset Demonstration includes the
results of a sensitivity analysis to
determine the emissions reductions
associated with CARB’s Advanced
Clean Cars program and the Truck and
Bus Regulations (calculated using
EMFAC2014), and the additional
stringency of CARB’s inspection and
maintenance programs (calculated using
EMFAC2011).
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and
110(l) require a state to provide
reasonable public notice and
opportunity for public hearing prior to
the adoption and submittal of a SIP or
SIP revision. To meet this requirement,
every SIP submittal should include
evidence that the state provided
adequate public notice and an
opportunity for a public hearing,
consistent with the EPA’s implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
The SCAQMD provided public notice
of its intent to approve the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan on November 4,
2020.32 The public comment period
ended with a public hearing on
December 4, 2020; no comments were
submitted during the public hearing.33
The SCAQMD responded to written
comments in Section 9 of the Plan. The
SCAQMD Governing Board documented
the adoption of the Plan in Board
Resolution 20–22, dated December 4,
2020. In addition to the comment period
and hearing, the SCAQMD convened
several steering committees and
advisory groups beginning in August
32 SCAQMD, Proof of Publication for Notice of
Public Hearing, dated November 4, 2020.
33 SCAQMD, Draft Minutes of Public Hearing,
dated December 4, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26821
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
2020.34 As documented in Executive
Order S–20–34, CARB determined that
the Plan met the requirements of the
Act, adopted the Plan, and ordered it to
be submitted to the EPA for inclusion in
the SIP.
The Plan includes proof of
publication for the notice of the District
public hearings, as evidence that all
hearings were properly noticed.
Therefore, we find the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan meets the procedural
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)
and 110(l).
CARB provided public notice of its
intent to approve the VMT Offset
Demonstration on January 21, 2021. The
public comment period ended with a
board meeting on February 25, 2021.
One person commented during the
public meeting, urging progress in
addressing air pollution in the
Coachella Valley without directly
addressing the VMT Offset
Demonstration. The CARB Governing
Board documented the adoption of the
VMT Offset Demonstration in Board
Resolution 21–1, dated February 25,
2021.
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that
the EPA determine whether a SIP
submittal is complete within 60 days of
receipt. This section of the CAA also
provides that any plan that the EPA has
not affirmatively determined to be
complete or incomplete is deemed
complete by operation of law six
months after the date of submittal. The
SIP submittal for the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan became complete by
operation of law on June 28, 2021, and
the submittal for the VMT Offset
Demonstration became complete by
operation of law on September 18, 2021.
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
Ozone Plan to determine if they are
consistent with EPA guidance and
adequate to support the Plan’s RACM,
RFP, ROP, and attainment
demonstrations.
2. Emissions Inventories in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions
Inventories
CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each
state with an ozone nonattainment area
classified under subpart 2 to submit a
‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources’’ of the relevant pollutants in
accordance with guidance provided by
the Administrator. While this inventory
is not a specific requirement under the
anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR
51.1105 and 51.1100(o), it provides
support for demonstrations required
under these anti-backsliding rules.
Additionally, a baseline emissions
inventory is needed for the attainment
demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. The 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as
the baseline year for RFP purposes.35
Emissions inventory guidance issued by
EPA sets specific planning requirements
pertaining to future milestone years for
reporting RFP and to attainment
demonstration years.36 Key RFP
analysis years in the RFP demonstration
include 2008 and every subsequent 3
years until the attainment date.
We have evaluated the emissions
inventories in the Coachella Valley
Chapter 3 and Appendix I of the Plan
contain detailed emissions estimates.
The District’s process for developing
these emissions estimates followed a
similar methodology to the inventories
in the 2016 AQMP.37 In general,
Appendix III of the 2016 AQMP
includes a more detailed discussion of
this methodology, and the Plan explains
relevant differences between the two
emissions estimates.
The Plan’s emissions estimates are
seasonally adjusted to summer
emissions when ozone concentrations
are highest. The Plan divides emissions
into the four categories of ‘‘point,’’
‘‘area,’’ ‘‘on-road,’’ and ‘‘off-road’’
sources, with point and area sources
grouped as ‘‘stationary sources’’ in
summary tables. The base year for the
emissions estimates is 2018. As Chapter
3 of the Plan explains, that data was
projected to 2020 and 2023. Appendix
I also contains full emissions
breakdowns projected back to 2002 (the
baseline year for the RFP
demonstration), and forward to 2020 (a
milestone year in the RFP
demonstration) and 2023 (the
attainment year). Table 1 compares
emissions for 2002, 2018, 2020, and
2023.
TABLE 1—COACHELLA VALLEY NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARIES FOR 2002, 2018, AND 2023
[Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] a
VOC
NOX
Category
2002
2020
2023
2002
2018
2020
2023
Combined Point and Area Sources .................
On-Road Mobile Sources ................................
Other Mobile Sources ......................................
1.40
41.07
11.77
1.59
11.18
5.56
1.14
9.53
5.10
1.18
6.85
4.30
7.63
10.47
4.76
7.18
3.89
3.30
7.74
3.33
3.23
8.32
2.90
3.22
Totals ........................................................
54.24
18.33
15.77
12.33
22.85
14.37
14.30
14.44
a Source:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
2018
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Appendix I for 2002, Table 3–1 for 2018, and Table 3–2 for 2023.
As described in the Plan, SCAQMD
Rule 301 requires stationary sources
emitting 4 tons per year (tpy) or more
of NOX or VOC to report facility
emissions directly to the District.
Sources with NOX and VOC emissions
below these thresholds are classified as
area sources. The area source category
includes aggregated emissions data from
34 SCAQMD, Governing Board Package for the
Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan, dated
December 4, 2020, Public Process, page 3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
processes that are individually small
and widespread. CARB and SCAQMD
jointly estimate emissions for more than
400 area source categories. Appendix I
of the Plan includes aggregate
categories, such as consumer products,
but not every individual category (e.g.,
hairspray). The Plan states that
‘‘emissions from these sources are
35 69
36 70
PO 00000
FR 23951, 23980 (April 30, 2004).
FR 71612.
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
estimated using specific activity
information and emission factors.
Activity data are usually obtained from
survey data or scientific reports, e.g.,
Energy Information Administration
reports for fuel consumption other than
natural gas fuel, Southern California Gas
Company for natural gas consumption,
paint supplier data under SCAQMD
37 2016 AQMP, approved by the EPA on
September 16, 2020 (85 FR 57714).
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26822
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Rule 314, ‘Fees for Architectural
Coatings,’ and District databases.’’ 38
Emission factors are values representing
the amount of NOX or VOC per amount
of fuel, hours of operation, or some
other measurement. The Plan’s emission
factors are based on ‘‘rule compliance
factors, source tests, manufacturer’s
product or technical specification data,
default factors (mostly from AP–42, the
EPA’s published emission factor
compilation), or weighted emission
factors derived from the point source
facilities’ annual emissions reports.’’ 39
Area source emissions are based on
emissions projections for 2018 and 2023
from the 2016 AQMP, ‘‘using growth
and control factors derived from
regulatory and socio-economic data.’’ 40
For on-road mobile source emissions,
which consists of emissions from trucks,
automobiles, buses, and motorcycles,
the Plan uses the vehicle activity from
the ‘‘2016–2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy’’ (‘‘2016–2040 RTP/SCS’’)
developed by the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG).
The Plan’s mobile source emission
factors come from CARB’s 2017
emissions factor model, known as
‘‘EMFAC2017,’’ which was the latest
model available for estimating on-road
motor vehicle emissions in California at
the time of its submission.41
The Plan also contains off-road NOX
and VOC inventories developed by
CARB using category-specific methods
and models.42 The off-road mobile
source category includes aircraft, trains,
ships, and off-road vehicles and
equipment used for construction,
farming, commercial, industrial, and
recreational activities. The 2016 AQMP
provides the growth factors used to
project base year emissions for the offroad sources.43
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 2018
base year. Growth factors used to project
38 Id.
39 Id.
at 3–2.
these baseline inventories are derived
mainly from data obtained from
SCAG.44
6.
memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on
Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) Requirements and Attainment
Demonstration Submissions for the
Ozone NAAQS,’’ John Seitz, November
30, 1999 (‘‘Seitz Memo’’). In summary,
EPA guidance provides that 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.48
Any measures that are necessary to
meet these requirements that are not
already either federally promulgated,
part of the SIP, or otherwise creditable
in SIPs must be submitted in
enforceable form as part of a state’s
attainment plan for the area. CAA
section 172(c)(6) requires nonattainment
plans to 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 attainment of such standards in such
area by the applicable attainment date.49
The purpose of the RACM analysis is
to determine whether or not control
measures exist that are economically
and technically reasonable and that
provide emissions reductions that
would advance the attainment date for
nonattainment areas. The EPA defines
RACM as any potential control measure
for application to point, area, on-road,
and non-road emission source categories
that: (1) is technologically feasible; (2) is
economically feasible; (3) does not
cause ‘‘substantial widespread and longterm adverse impacts;’’ (4) is not
‘‘absurd, unenforceable, or
impracticable;’’ and (5) can advance the
attainment date by at least one year.50
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
45 EPA, Region IX, ‘‘Technical Support
Document, Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of California; Coachella
Valley; Extreme Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standards, Docket: EPA–R09–OAR–2023–
0448, Additional Supporting Information for Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking,’’ March 2024.
46 See 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
47 See 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 1992). The
General Preamble describes the EPA’s preliminary
view on how we would interpret various SIP
planning provisions in title I of the CAA as
amended in 1990, including those planning
provisions applicable to the 1-hour ozone
standards. The EPA continues to rely on certain
guidance in the General Preamble to implement the
8-hour ozone standards under title I.
48 General Preamble at 13560; see also
Memorandum dated December 14, 2000, from John
S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, to Regional Air Directors,
‘‘Additional Submission on RACM from States with
Severe One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs.’’
49 See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
50 General Preamble at 13560.
3. Proposed Action on the Emissions
Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions
inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and the inventory
methodologies used by the District and
CARB for consistency with CAA section
182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We find
that the base year and projected
attainment year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventories of actual and projected
emissions of NOX and VOC in the
Coachella Valley as of the date of the
submittal. Accordingly, we propose to
find that these inventories provide an
appropriate basis for the various other
elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan, including the RACM, ROP, RFP,
and attainment demonstrations. The
technical support document (TSD)
accompanying this proposed
rulemaking identifies SCAQMD rules
submitted to the EPA for SIP approval
after submittal of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and compares emissions in
the Plan with emissions in the
previously approved Severe attainment
plan.45
B. Reasonably Available Control
Measures Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
1. RACM Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that
each attainment plan provide for the
implementation of all reasonable
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and provide
for attainment of the NAAQS. The
RACM demonstration requirement is a
continuing applicable requirement for
the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s
anti-backsliding rules that apply for
revoked standards.46
The EPA has previously provided
guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the ‘‘General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990’’
(‘‘General Preamble’’) 47 and in a
40 Id.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
41 EMFAC
is short for EMission FACtor. The EPA
announced the availability of the EMFAC2017
model for use in state implementation plan
development and transportation conformity in
California on August 15, 2019. 84 FR 41717. The
EPA’s approval of the EMFAC2017 emissions
model for SIP and conformity purposes was
effective on the date of publication of the notice in
the Federal Register.
42 Detailed information on CARB’s off-road motor
vehicle emissions inventory methodologies is found
at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/msei-roaddocumentation.
43 2016 AQMP, Appendix III, pp. III–1–24 to III–
1–27.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
44 2016
PO 00000
AQMP, 7–25, and Appendix III, p. III–2–
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
issued a Control Techniques Guidelines
document. CAA section 182(f) requires
that RACT under section 182(b)(2) also
apply to major stationary sources of
NOX. In Extreme areas, a major source
is a stationary source that emits or has
the potential to emit at least 10 tpy of
VOC or NOX.51 Under the 1997 Ozone
Implementation rule, states were
required to submit SIP revisions
meeting the RACT requirements of CAA
sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) no later
than 27 months after designation for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards
(September 15, 2006, for areas
designated in April 2004) and to
implement the required RACT measures
no later than 30 months after that
submittal deadline.52 The EPA has
approved the Severe area RACT SIP for
the SCAQMD for the 1997 ozone
standards, which included rules
applicable to the Coachella Valley.53
With the reclassification from Severe to
Extreme nonattainment, the major
source threshold shifts from 25 tpy to 10
tpy, changing the NOX and VOC sources
subject to the RACT requirements.
While this action does not address the
Coachella Valley’s RACT
demonstration, we will consider the
rules in relevant RACT demonstrations
as potentially addressing RACM
demonstration requirements.
2. Control Strategy and RACM
Demonstration in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
a. The District’s Component of the
RACM Demonstration
The RACM demonstration begins on
page 6–12 of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan. The Plan’s RACM
demonstration builds on the SCAQMD’s
prior RACM demonstrations for the
Coachella Valley and South Coast Air
Basin for the 2008 ozone standards in
the 2016 AQMP, which the EPA
approved in 2020.54 The Plan
supplements this demonstration by
evaluating as potential RACM new rules
put in place after the 2016 AQMP and
rules for area sources. The SCAQMD
compared its rules with rules from other
air districts within California (i.e., the
51 CAA
section 182(d).
40 CFR 51.912(a). Following the
reclassification of the Coachella Valley to Extreme
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards,
the EPA established a deadline of February 14,
2021, for the State to submit SIP revisions
addressing the CAA section 182(b)(2) and 182(f)
RACT requirements. 85 FR 2311, 2312 (January 15,
2020).
53 73 FR 76947 (December 18, 2008).
54 The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan incorrectly
identifies the EPA’s approval of the RACM
demonstration as 82 FR 26854 (June 12, 2017), but
the actual approval was published at 85 FR 57714
(September 16, 2020).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
52 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District, the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District, the
Ventura County Air Pollution Control
District, the Antelope Valley Air Quality
Management District, and the Mojave
Desert Air Quality Management District)
and from air quality agencies in
Delaware and Texas.
The evaluation of other districts’ and
states’ rules for stationary and area
sources did not identify any rules as
potential RACM. In all but a few cases,
SCAQMD rules were as stringent or
more stringent than other rules. Where
other rules were more stringent, the
SCAQMD still determined that its rules
provided RACM-level controls. For
example, the VOC control efficiency of
SCAQMD Rule 461, ‘‘Organic Liquid
Loading,’’ is less stringent than another
rule (i.e., 90 percent vs. 95 percent), but
actual operational control efficiency at
SCAQMD facilities exceeded the higher
(95 percent) limit. In another example,
SCAQMD Rule 1162, ‘‘Polyester Resin
Operations,’’ which regulates more than
15 different categories of wood product
coatings, has a lower limit than another
district for one category, high-solid
stains (240 grams per liter vs. 350 grams
per liter), but ‘‘for almost all categories,
Rule 1136 is as stringent as the other
agency’s rule and provides RACM level
of control for this source category.’’ 55
The Plan also highlights rules and
programs revised since the completion
of the 2016 AQMP that are anticipated
to achieve additional reductions when
fully implemented as planned. Table 4–
1 of the Plan shows these measures have
collectively further reduced emissions
by 6.3 tons per day (tpd) of NOX and 2.3
tpd of VOC.56 These reductions would
occur primarily in the South Coast Air
Basin; however, as the Plan explains,
the ozone air quality problems of the
Coachella Valley are primarily caused
by transported emissions from within
the South Coast Air Basin. The TSD for
this proposed rulemaking supplements
the District’s analysis with a discussion
of rules adopted by the SCAQMD since
the completion of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan.
The 2016 AQMP included several
commitments for additional emissions
reductions, such as for the applications
of zero or near-zero NOX emissions
appliances in the residential and
commercial sectors (CMB–02),
additional enhancement in reducing
energy use in existing residential
buildings (ECC–03), and co-benefits
55 Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Table 6–10 at p.
6–17.
56 Table 4–1 does not total the emission
reductions for all measures.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26823
from existing residential and
commercial building energy efficiency
mandates (ECC–02). Collectively, these
measures are expected to achieve 2.6
tpd of NOX reductions by 2023 in the
South Coast Air Basin.57 Consistent
with the emissions reductions from new
and recently revised rules, the benefits
achieved are primarily expected in the
South Coast Air Basin.
b. Local Jurisdiction Component of the
RACM Demonstration
With respect to on-road mobile
sources, we note that SCAG is the
designated metropolitan planning
organization (MPO) for a large portion of
southern California, including Coachella
Valley, and SCAG’s membership
includes local jurisdictions within the
Coachella Valley. For the 2016 AQMP,
SCAG evaluated a list of possible
transportation control measures (TCMs)
as one element of the larger RACM
evaluation for the plan. TCMs are, in
general, measures designed to reduce
emissions from on-road motor vehicles
through reductions in VMT or traffic
congestion.
In our final actions on the Severe area
RACM requirements for the Coachella
Valley for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone standards,58 we concluded that
the evaluation processes undertaken by
SCAG were consistent with the EPA’s
RACM guidance and found that there
were no additional RACM, including no
additional TCMs that would advance
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards in the South Coast Air
Basin.59 More recently, we came to the
same conclusion with respect to RACM
and TCMs for the South Coast in our
action on the ozone portion of the
SCAQMD’s ‘‘Final 2012 Air Quality
Management Plan.’’ 60
Although TCMs are implemented in
the upwind South Coast Air Basin area
to meet CAA requirements, neither the
SCAQMD nor CARB rely on
implementation of any TCMs in the
Coachella Valley to demonstrate
implementation of RACM in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The
SCAQMD and CARB justify the absence
of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by
reference to the significant influence of
pollutant transport from the South Coast
Air Basin on ozone conditions in the
Coachella Valley.61
57 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6–20.
FR 26854 and 85 FR 57714.
59 See also 81 FR 75764 (November 1, 2016)
(proposed rule for 1997 8-hour ozone standards).
60 See 79 FR 29712, 29720 (May 23, 2014)
(proposed rule); 79 FR 52526 (September 3, 2014)
(final rule).
61 See Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6–29.
58 82
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26824
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
c. The Statewide Component of the
RACM Demonstration
CARB has primary responsibility for
reducing emissions in California from
new and existing on-road and off-road
engines and vehicles, motor vehicle
fuels, and consumer products. CARB
has been a leader in the development of
stringent control measures for on-road
and off-road mobile sources, fuels, and
consumer products. Because of this role,
the Plan identifies CARB’s 2016 State
Strategy as a key component of the
control strategy necessary to attain the
State’s ozone goals, which includes
attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The
Plan states that California has received
waivers and authorizations for over 100
regulations and lists several recent
examples, such as rules governing light, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles; offroad vehicles and engines; and other
sources including motorcycles,
recreational boats, off-road recreational
vehicles, cargo handling equipment, and
commercial harbor craft.62 The Plan
highlights reductions achieved through
‘‘more stringent engine emissions
standards, in-use requirements,
incentive funding, and other policies
and initiatives’’ since the EPA’s 2019
approval of the South Coast Air Basin
RACM demonstration for the 2008
ozone standards.63
The CARB portion of the RACM
evaluation also covers consumer
products. CARB regulates VOC
emissions from more than 130 consumer
products, with the most recent rule
revisions in 2018. The federal
regulations for consumer products were
last amended in 1998.64 Since submittal
of the Plan, CARB has submitted
additional consumer product
regulations for approval into the SIP,
but EPA has yet to act on this
submittal.65
3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the Control
Strategy and RACM
We find that the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan includes a thorough update
of the District’s RACM demonstration
for the 2008 ozone standards from the
2016 AQMP that we previously
approved in 2020.66 This updated
demonstration focuses on new rules put
in place by five California air districts
and two states since completion of the
2016 AQMP, and we propose to find
62 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6–26.
63 Id. at 6–28 et seq.
64 Id. at 6–29.
65 Letter dated April 25, 2023, from Steve S. Cliff,
CARB, to Martha Guzman, EPA Region IX,
transmitting 2021 amendments to CARB’s consumer
product regulations (submitted electronically April
25, 2023).
66 85 FR 57714.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
that it demonstrates that the District’s
stationary source controls represent
RACM for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards.
With respect to mobile sources, we
find that CARB’s current program
addresses the full range of mobile
sources in the South Coast Air Basin
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 adopted those
measures that are reasonably available.
As noted in the TSD supporting this
rulemaking, following submittal of the
2016 State Strategy, CARB has
continued to submit mobile source
control measures, such as the HeavyDuty Inspection and Maintenance
Regulation, which expands the
inspection of heavy-duty trucks beyond
particulate matter emissions to include
the equipment controlling NOX
emissions.
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 Air Basin are inclusive of
all TCM RACM to be reasonably
justified and supported. For the 2016
AQMP, given the minimal and
diminishing emissions benefits
generally associated with TCMs, no
combination of TCMs implemented in
the Coachella Valley could have
contributed to advancing the attainment
date in the Coachella Valley, and no
TCMs are reasonably available for
implementation in the Coachella Valley
for the purposes of meeting the RACM
requirement.67
Additionally, we find that CARB’s
consumer products program generally
exceeds the controls in place throughout
other areas of the country. The
additional commitments included in the
2016 State Strategy further strengthen
this program by achieving additional
VOC reductions. Some of the committed
measures have already been submitted
to the EPA, including lower VOC
emission limits for seven consumer
product categories.68
67 While not required for CAA purposes, the
2016–2040 RTP/SCS includes a list of projects for
the Coachella Valley, some of which represent the
types of projects often identified as TCMs, such as
traffic signalization projects and bike lane projects.
2016–2040 RTP/SCS, Appendix, ‘‘Project List.’’
68 Letter dated April 25, 2023, from Steve S. Cliff,
CARB to Martha Guzman, EPA Region IX,
transmitting 2021 amendments to CARB’s consumer
product regulations (submitted electronically April
25, 2023).
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
While the Plan does not quantify the
amount of reductions necessary to
advance attainment by one year, in view
of the current timing of this proposed
approval, the Coachella Valley no longer
has a practical opportunity to advance
attainment prior to 2023. Therefore, the
EPA is proposing to find that the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan provides
for implementation of all RACM
necessary to demonstrate expeditious
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards in the Coachella Valley,
consistent with the applicable
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(17).
C. Attainment Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) 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.
In accordance with 40 CFR 51.903(a),
areas classified Extreme for the 1997
ozone NAAQS must demonstrate
attainment as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 20 years
after the effective date of designation to
nonattainment. The Coachella Valley
was designated nonattainment for the
1997 ozone NAAQS effective June 15,
2004,69 and accordingly, the area must
demonstrate attainment of the standards
by June 15, 2024. An attainment
demonstration must show attainment of
the standards by the calendar year prior
to the attainment date, so in practice,
Extreme nonattainment areas must
demonstrate attainment in 2023.
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,’’ EPA
454/R–18–009, November 2018
69 69
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
FR 23858.
16APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(‘‘Modeling Guidance’’).70 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 concentrations due to future
emissions reductions provides a relative
response factor (RRF). Each monitoring
site’s RRF is applied to its monitored
base period 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 1997 8-hour ozone
plans.71 The Modeling Guidance states
that the most recent year of the National
Emissions Inventory may be appropriate
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.72 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
70 The EPA modeling guidance is available on the
EPA website at: https://www.epa.gov/scram/stateimplementation-plan-sip-attainmentdemonstration-guidance; direct link: https://
www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/O3-PMRH-Modeling_Guidance-2018.pdf. 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-modelingguidance.
71 Modeling Guidance, 35.
72 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
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.73
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
Chapter 5 of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan includes a description of
photochemical modeling performed by
the SCAQMD for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. The modeling relies on a
2018 model base year and projects
design values to demonstrate attainment
of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in 2023.
Chapter 5, ‘‘Future Air Quality,’’ of
the Plan, includes a description of
current air quality in the Coachella
Valley, a summary of the ozone
modeling approach, a model
performance evaluation, results of the
NAAQS attainment test, an
unmonitored area analysis, an
assessment of ozone sensitivity to NOX
and VOC reductions, and a WOE
analysis. The Plan uses the same
approach that is outlined in more detail
in the 2016 AQMP, with some updates
to the modeling platform, input
databases, and emissions inventories.
Like the 2016 AQMP, the Plan uses the
EPA recommended Community
Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System
(CMAQ, version 5.0.2) modeling
platform. An overview of the modeling
approach and modeling protocol can be
found in the 2016 AQMP, Appendix V,
‘‘Modeling and Attainment
Demonstrations,’’ Chapter 1, ‘‘Modeling
Overview,’’ and Chapter 2 ‘‘Modeling
Protocol.’’ While the 2016 AQMP used
2012 as the model base year, the Plan
uses 2018 as the model base year on
which to develop meteorological
conditions and emissions inventories.
Meteorological fields were developed
for 2018 using the Weather Research
and Forecasting Model (WRF, version
4.0.3) from the National Center for
Atmospheric Research. Input
information and model evaluation for
WRF version 4.03 can be found in the
SCAQMD, ‘‘Final 2022 Air Quality
Management Plan,’’ adopted December
2, 2022 (‘‘2022 AQMP’’), Appendix V,
Chapter 3, ‘‘Meteorological Modeling
and Sensitivity Analyses.’’
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 is
adequate for modeling Coachella Valley
ozone. The WRF modeling uses
routinely available meteorological and
air quality data collected during 2018.
Those data cover May through
September, a period that spans the
period of highest ozone concentrations
in the Coachella Valley. The District
evaluated the WRF model performance
and concluded that the WRF simulation
for 2018 provided representative
meteorological fields that well
characterized the observed conditions.
The District’s conclusions were
supported by statistical metrics and
hourly time series plots of water vapor
mixing ratio, wind speed, direction, and
temperature for the southern California
domain as well an evaluation of the
predicted planetary boundary layer
height and the coast-to-inland
temperature gradient.
Ozone model performance statistics
are described in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan at Chapter 5.74 This chapter
includes a table of statistics
recommended in the Modeling
Guidance and hourly ozone time series
plots for 2018. The hourly time series
and statistics show generally good
model performance, though many
individual daily ozone peaks are
underpredicted.75 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 2018
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
2018 and the 2023 attainment year. The
base year or ‘‘reference year’’ modeling
inventory was the same as the inventory
for the modeling base case. The 2023
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, 2018, was
simulated and analyzed to determine 8hour average maximum ozone
concentrations for the 2018 and 2023
emissions inventories. To develop the
RRFs for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards, only the top 10 days were
used, consistent with the Modeling
Guidance.76
The Modeling Guidance addresses
attainment demonstrations with ozone
NAAQS based on 8-hour averages and
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS the
74 Coachella
PO 00000
also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Valley Ozone Plan, Chapter 5, 5–4—
5–5.
75 Coachella
73 See
26825
76 Modeling
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
Valley Ozone Plan, Figure 5–2.
Guidance, section 4.2.1.
16APP1
26826
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan carries out
the attainment test procedure consistent
with the Modeling Guidance. The RRFs
are calculated as the ratio of future to
base year concentrations; these were
then applied to weighted base year
design values for each monitor to arrive
at future year design values.77 Ozone is
measured continuously at two locations
in the Coachella Valley at the Palm
Springs and Indio air monitoring
stations. The modeled 2023 ozone
design value at the Palm Springs site
(the higher of the two sites) is 0.0832
ppm; this value demonstrates
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS.78
The Plan modeling includes an
‘‘Unmonitored Area Analysis’’ (UAA) to
assess whether locations without a
monitor can reach attainment; the
standard attainment test procedure
covers only locations with a monitor. A
UAA is recommended in the Modeling
Guidance, but not required in the 1997
Ozone Implementation Rule—Phase 2.79
Consistent with EPA Guidance, the
District calculated five-year weighted
design values for all monitoring stations
that meet EPA’s data quality
requirements within the modeling
domain and spatially interpolated
concentrations for the area between the
design values. RRFs were then applied
to the interpolated measurement field to
calculate future year design values. The
District asserts that when all valid ozone
design values were interpolated, they
were too sparsely populated near the
boundary of Coachella Valley to
reasonably guide design value contours.
To compensate, the District excluded
the Morongo monitor and added several
pseudo-monitors throughout the domain
to guide the interpolation.80 With these
modifications the predicted future
design values are all below the level of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
throughout the domain.
In addition to the formal attainment
demonstration, the Plan also contains a
WOE demonstration that includes
ambient ozone data and trends and a
sensitivity analysis using CMAQ 5.3.1, a
later version of the model to
complement the regional photochemical
modeling analyses.
for 80 percent of regional NOX
emissions, are the primary focus of
future emissions reductions.
A thorough discussion of the
SCAQMD’s control strategy for the
Coachella Valley appears in the 2016
AQMP. The 2016 AQMP provides the
District’s control strategy through the
2026 attainment year for the 2008 ozone
standards. The Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan provides an update to that
discussion, specifically focusing on the
measures implemented after the 2016
AQMP that result in emissions
reductions by 2023.
The South Coast Air Basin control
b. Control Strategy
strategy for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
relies on emissions reductions from
The control strategy for attainment of
the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella already-adopted measures,
commitments by the District to certain
Valley relies primarily on timely
regulatory and nonregulatory initiatives
attainment in 2023 of the 1997 ozone
and aggregate emissions reductions, and
NAAQS in the South Coast Air Basin.
commitments by SCAQMD and CARB to
As described in the Coachella Valley
certain regulatory and nonregulatory
Ozone Plan and in Section I.B of this
initiatives and aggregate emissions
document, the primary cause of ozone
reductions. In the 2016 AQMP, alreadyin the Coachella Valley is the transport
adopted measures are expected to
of ozone and its precursors from the
achieve approximately 66 percent of the
South Coast Air Basin.
NOX reductions needed from a 2012
Because ozone concentrations at the
base year for the South Coast Air Basin
Palm Springs monitor—the only
to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS in
monitoring site currently exceeding the
2023. To address the remaining
8-hour 1997 ozone NAAQS—are more
emissions reductions, which are shown
sensitive to changes in NOX than
VOCs,81 the Plan’s control strategy relies in Table 2, the 2016 AQMP included
District and CARB aggregate
on NOX reductions and limited VOC
commitments to achieve additional
reductions. Since the EPA’s
emissions reductions by 2023. These
promulgation of the 1997 ozone
reductions are discussed in the EPA’s
NAAQS, NOX emissions in the South
proposed approval of the 2016 AQMP
Coast Air Basin have declined by 76
for the South Coast Air Basin.83
percent.82 Mobile sources, responsible
TABLE 2—DISTRICT AND CARB AGGREGATE EMISSION REDUCTION COMMITMENTS FOR 2023
[tpd]
Plan
NOX
VOC
SCAQMD a ...............................................................................................................................................................
CARB b .....................................................................................................................................................................
23
113
6
50–51
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
136
56–57
a Source:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
2016 AQMP at Table 4–10.
b Source: 2016 AQMP at Table 4–5.
The Plan updates this analysis to
incorporate more recent SCAQMD and
CARB rules and programs that continue
to achieve emissions reductions in
future baseline emissions for both the
South Coast Air Basin and Coachella
Valley. For SCAQMD, the revised
regulations are Regulation XX,
‘‘RECLAIM Program;’’ Rule 1111,
‘‘Reduction of NOX Emissions form
Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central
Furnaces,’’ and the CLEANair Furnace
Rebate Program; Rule 1146.2, ‘‘Large
Water Heater, Small Boilers and Process
77 The Modeling Guidance recommends that
RRFs be applied to the average of three 3-year
design values centered on the base year. For a 2018
base year, recommended design values would be
2016–2018, 2017–2019, and 2018–2020. This
amounts to a 5-year weighted average of individual
year 4th high concentrations, centered on the base
year of 2018, and so is referred to as a weighted
design value. The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan was
adopted in December 2020, before 2020 monitoring
data was available, so the Plan instead uses design
values for 2015–2017, 2016–2018, and 2017–2019.
78 Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, 5–6.
79 70 FR 71612.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Heaters;’’ and Rule 1147, ‘‘NOX
Reductions from Miscellaneous
Sources.’’ The District’s incentive
programs include the Carl Moyer
Memorial Air Quality Standards
Attainment Program to retrofit and
replace heavy-duty diesel engines;
80 Coachella
81 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5–6.
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5–8 and Figure
5–5.
82 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 4–1.
FR 28132 (June 17, 2019), Sections
III.D.2.B.i and ii.
83 84
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Clean School Buses Incentives; and the
Surplus Off-Road Opt-In for NOX
Program for low emission heavy duty
engines for off-road diesel fleets.84 For
CARB, the regulations that continue to
result in improved future emissions
estimates include the Advanced Clean
Cars program, the Truck and Bus
Regulation, and the In-Use Large Spark
Ignition Fleet Regulation.85
The Plan also highlights rules and
programs that continue to achieve
reductions that have not been factored
into the future emissions estimates for
SCAQMD and CARB. SCAQMD efforts
include Rule 1117, ‘‘Emissions of
Oxides of Nitrogen form Glass Melting
Furnaces;’’ Rule 1134, ‘‘Emissions of
Oxides from Stationary Gas Turbines’’;
Rule 1135, ‘‘Emissions of Oxides of
Nitrogen from Electricity Generating
Facilities;’’ and facility-based mobile
source measures covering marine ports
railyards, warehouse/distribution
centers, commercial developments and
new developments and redevelopment
projects.86 Table 4–1 shows estimated
reductions for these rules and facilitybased mobile source measures. Some of
the measures continue to increase
reductions in future years, including
adopted CARB regulations not reflected
in the future emissions estimate such as
the Innovative Clean Transit Regulation;
the Zero-Emission Airport Shuttle
Regulation; the Advanced Clean Truck
regulation and the Omnibus Low-NOX
Regulation. All measures that achieve
further emissions reduction and not
reflected in the future 2023 emissions
estimate serve to increase the likelihood
that the Coachella Valley attains the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
c. Attainment Demonstration
Chapter 5 of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan describes the Coachella
Valley’s progress toward attaining the
1997 ozone standards. The Plan
summarizes the District’s modeling for
the area and concludes that the
measures included in the control
strategy (including CARB commitments)
will result in the area attaining the
standards no later than 2023. The WOE
discussion provides additional
discussion of air quality trends and
projections in the Coachella Valley and
determines that the area is on track to
attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS by 2023.
84 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, pp. 4–2 to 4–4.
complete list of incentive programs is
provided on pages 4–3 to 4–4 of the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan.
86 Id. at 4–4 to 4–6.
85 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
As discussed in Section III.A of this
document, we are proposing to approve
the base year emissions inventory for
the attainment demonstration and to
find that the future year emissions
projections in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan reflect appropriate
calculation methods and that the latest
planning assumptions are properly
supported by SIP-approved stationary
source and mobile source measures. The
Plan employs the modeling protocol
from the 2016 AQMP, and Appendix V
of that document in particular, with
updates to the modeling platform, input
databases, and emissions inventory.87
The discussion below addresses
modeling information included in both
the Plan and the 2016 AQMP. 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 the Coachella Valley and the
South Coast Air Basin. Similar and
additional discussion for the South
Coast Air Basin can be found in our
June 17, 2019 proposed action on the
2016 AQMP.88
Based on our review of the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, the EPA finds that
the photochemical modeling is adequate
for purposes of supporting the
attainment demonstration.89 First, we
note the discussion of modeling
procedures, tests, and performance
analyses called for in the Modeling
Protocol (i.e., 2016 AQMP, Appendix V,
Chapter 2) and the good model
performance (Coachella Valley Ozone
Plan, Chapter 5). Second, we find the
WRF meteorological model results and
performance statistics, including hourly
time series graphs of water vapor mixing
ratio, wind speed, direction, and
temperature for both the South Coast
and the Coachella Valley, to be
satisfactory and consistent with our
Modeling Guidance.90 Performance was
evaluated for the winter season
(January, November, and December
2018) and summer season (June, July,
and August 2018).91 Diurnal variation of
temperature, humidity, and surface
87 Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5–2 and 5–8.
FR 28132.
89 The EPA’s review of the modeling and
attainment demonstration is discussed in greater
detail in section V of the TSD for this action
(‘‘Modeling and Attainment Demonstration’’).
90 Modeling Guidance, 30.
91 Temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, and
wind speed were evaluated in terms of normalized
gross bias and normalized gross error.
88 84
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26827
wind are well represented by WRF.
Temperature and wind speed are more
accurate in the summer season than in
the winter months. The observed
temperature gradient from the coast to
inland was well characterized by WRF.
Both the observational data and WRF
simulation showed distinct diurnal
variations in wind speed in the summer,
with a strong sea breeze in the afternoon
responsible for transport inland. In
general, the WRF simulations reproduce
the dominant wind direction as the
measurement at each station. The
diurnal cycle in PBL height was well
captured by the simulations. Overall,
the daily WRF simulation for 2018
provided representative meteorological
fields that characterized the observed
conditions well.
The model performance statistics for
ozone are described in Chapter 5 of the
Plan and are based on the statistical
evaluation recommended in the
Modeling Guidance. Model performance
was provided for 8-hour daily maximum
ozone in the nonattainment area. As
noted in Section IV.C.2.a of this
document, the statistics and hourly time
series show generally good performance,
and while many individual daily ozone
peaks are underpredicted, this does not
mean that future concentrations based
on monitored data and modeled RRFs
will be underestimated. In addition, the
WOE analysis presented provides
additional information with respect to
the observational trends and further
supports the model performance.
Notwithstanding the general
sufficiency of the modeling, we find that
the Plan’s UAA analysis does not
provide justification for excluding the
Morongo monitor or for adding pseudomonitors to alter the interpolation. We
therefore conclude the UAA is not
sufficiently supported, and we are not
evaluating those results here. However,
we conclude that based on the density
of the ozone monitoring stations within
the Coachella Valley and upwind, as
well as the uncertainty in the
interpolation due to complex
topography, the attainment
demonstration is adequately supported
without a UAA. We recommend that
CARB and SCAQMD evaluate the
continuing adequacy of the existing
monitors as part of their ambient air
monitoring network 5-year network
assessment.
The modeling shows that existing
control measures from CARB and the
District, together with the commitments
in the 2016 AQMP and further updated
in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, are
sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards by 2023 at all
monitoring sites in the Coachella Valley.
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26828
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
We are proposing to find the air quality
modeling adequate to support the
attainment demonstration for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, based on reasonable
meteorological and ozone modeling
performance, and supported by the
WOE analysis.
For additional information, please see
the TSD for this action.
b. Control Strategy
The control strategy in the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan relies primarily on
previously adopted and future
emissions reductions detailed in the
2016 AQMP. As described in Section
IV.C.2.b of this document, 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 1997 ozone NAAQS
in 2023. In our October 1, 2019 approval
of the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP, the
EPA approved the control strategy to
attain the 2008 ozone standards for the
Coachella Valley by 2026, including
CARB’s and the District’s aggregate
commitments, for the South Coast to
attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS.92
For the reasons described in that
action and based on the District’s
demonstration specific to the Coachella
Valley described in this section, we
propose to find the District’s control
strategy acceptable for purposes of
attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards in the Coachella Valley. For
additional information, please see the
TSD for this action.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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 1997
ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12). This
demonstration shows the area attaining
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards by the
outermost statutory attainment date of
June 15, 2024.
92 84
FR 52005.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable
Further Progress Demonstrations
1. Rate of Progress
For areas classified as Moderate or
above, CAA section 182(b)(1) requires a
SIP revision providing for ROP, defined
as a one time, 15 percent actual VOC
emissions reduction during the six years
following the baseline year 1990, or an
average of 3 percent per year. While the
ROP demonstration is a potentially
applicable continuing applicable
requirement, the EPA has already
approved the 15 percent VOC only ROP
demonstration for Coachella Valley for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, so this
requirement has been met.93
2. Reasonable Further Progress
a. Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1)
require plans for nonattainment areas to
provide for RFP. RFP is defined in CAA
section 171(1) as ‘‘such annual
incremental reductions in emissions of
the relevant air pollutant as are required
by this part or may reasonably be
required by the Administrator for the
purpose of ensuring attainment of the
applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable
date.’’ CAA section 182(c)(2)(B) requires
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
Serious or higher to submit no later than
3 years after designation for the 1997 8hour ozone standards an RFP SIP
providing for an average of 3 percent per
year of VOC and/or NOX emissions
reductions for (1) the 6-year period
immediately following the baseline
year; and (2) all remaining 3-year
periods after the first 6-year period out
to the area’s attainment date.94 The RFP
requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley
under the EPA’s anti-backsliding rules
that apply once a standard has been
revoked. See 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(4).
CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for
the substitution of NOX emissions
reductions in place of VOC reductions
to meet the RFP requirements.
According to the EPA’s NOX
Substitution Guidance,95 the
substitution of NOX reductions for VOC
reductions must be done on a
percentage basis, rather than a straight
FR 26854.
the reclassification of the Coachella
Valley to Extreme nonattainment for the 1997 8hour ozone standards, the EPA established a
deadline of February 14, 2021, for the state to
submit SIP revisions addressing the CAA section
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) RFP requirements.
85 FR 2311, 2312.
95 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, ‘‘NOX Substitution Guidance,’’
December 1993.
ton-for-ton exchange. There are two
steps for substituting NOX for VOC.
First, an equivalency demonstration
must show that the cumulative RFP
emissions reductions are consistent
with the NOX and VOC emissions
reductions determined in the ozone
attainment modeling demonstration.
Second, specified reductions in NOX
and VOC emissions should be
accomplished after the initial 6-year
ROP reductions are achieved and before
the attainment date, consistent with the
continuous RFP emission reduction
requirement.96
Section 182(b)(1) requires that
reductions exclude emissions
reductions from four prescribed federal
programs (i.e., the federal motor vehicle
control program, the federal Reid vapor
pressure (RVP) requirements, any RACT
corrections previously specified by the
EPA, and any I/M program corrections
necessary to meet the Basic I/M level);
and (3) be calculated from an ‘‘adjusted’’
baseline relative to the year for which
the reduction is applicable.
The adjusted base year inventory
must exclude the emissions reductions
from fleet turnover between 1990 and
1996 and from federal RVP regulations
promulgated by November 15, 1990, or
required under section 211(h) of the
Act. The net effect of these adjustments
is that states are not able to take credit
for emissions reductions that would
result from fleet turnover of current
federal-standard cars and trucks, or from
already existing federal fuel regulations.
However, the SIP can take full credit for
the benefits of any post-1990 vehicle
emissions standards, as well as any
other new federal or state motor vehicle
or fuel programs that will be
implemented in the nonattainment area,
including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new
evaporative emissions standards,
reformulated gasoline, Enhanced I/M,
California low emissions vehicle
program, transportation control
measures, etc.
b. RFP Demonstration in the State
Submittal
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
contains emissions estimates for the
baseline, milestone, and attainment
years.97 Tables 3 and 4 show the RFP
demonstration.98 The RFP
93 82
94 Following
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96 As noted in Section IV.D.1 of this document,
Coachella Valley has already met the 15 percent
ROP demonstration requirement.
97 Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, pp. 6–1 to 6–7.
98 The years between 2002 and 2020 were
addressed in the ‘‘Staff Report, Proposed Updates
to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, State
Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert’’ (‘‘2014 SIP Update’’) which
covered the Coachella Valley’s Severe area
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26829
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
demonstration calculates future year
VOC targets from the 2002 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. The District concluded
that RFP demonstration meets the
applicable requirements for each
milestone year as well as the attainment
year.
TABLE 3—CALCULATION OF RFP DEMONSTRATION FOR COACHELLA VALLEY—VOC a
2002 b
VOC emission calculations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Baseline VOC (tpd) .................................................................................................................
Required Percent Reductions from Base Year (%) ................................................................
Target VOC Level (tpd) ...........................................................................................................
Cumulative Milestone Year Shortfall (tpd) ..............................................................................
Cumulative Shortfall in VOC (%) .............................................................................................
Incremental Milestone Year Shortfall (%) ...............................................................................
22.85
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2020 b
2023 b
14.30
51%
11.2
3.1
13.6%
13.6%
14.44
60%
9.1
5.3
37.1%
23.5%
a Source:
b Units
Table 6–1 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
are tons per day (summer planning) unless otherwise noted.
TABLE 4—CALCULATION OF RFP DEMONSTRATION FOR COACHELLA VALLEY—NOX a
2002 b
NOX emission calculations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Baseline NOX Emissions (tpd) ................................................................................................
Reductions in NOX Emissions since Base Year (tpd) ............................................................
Percent Reductions in NOX Emissions since Base Year .......................................................
Previous NOX Substitution (%) ................................................................................................
Percent Available for NOX Substitution (%) ............................................................................
Incremental Milestone Year VOC Shortfall (%) ......................................................................
Percent Surplus Reduction (%) ...............................................................................................
RFP Compliance .....................................................................................................................
54.24
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2020 b
2023 b
15.77
38.47
70.9%
n/a
70.9%
13.6%
57.3%
Yes
12.33
41.91
77.3%
13.6%
63.7%
23.5%
40.2%
Yes
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
a Source: Table 6–2 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. Table 4 of this document has been adapted from Table 6–2 to remove adjustments
related to use of excess NOX emissions reductions to address the contingency measures requirements of CAA sections 179(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).
Under the EPA’s most recent guidance (described in Section IV.G.1 of this document), excess NOX reductions may not be used for this purpose.
b Units are tons per day (summer planning) unless otherwise noted.
CAA section 182(b)(1)(D) prohibits
states from taking credit for certain
categories of measures in an RFP
demonstration. The three categories of
non-creditable measures identified in
CAA sections 182(b)(1)(D)(iii)-(iv)
achieved their reductions many years
ago and reductions from these measures
would have no effect for the RFP
milestones modeled in the Plan.99 All
categories of non-creditable emissions
are considered de minimis for the 2008
or 2015 ozone NAAQS (and therefore do
not need to be calculated as part of in
an RFP demonstration for these
standards).100 While emissions from the
category identified in CAA section
182(b)(1)(D)(i) (‘‘any measure relating to
motor vehicle exhaust or evaporative
emissions promulgated by the
Administrator by January 1, 1990’’)
affect the demonstration for the 1997 8hour ozone standards, the change in this
effect becomes smaller with each
successive milestone year. CARB has
provided estimates for non-creditable
emissions, which are less than 10
percent of the base year inventory. For
more information about the correction
to the non-creditable reductions in the
requirements for the 1997 ozone standards. 82 FR
26854.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
2014 SIP Update, including a revised
RFP demonstration, see the TSD
supporting this proposed rule.
3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP
Demonstrations
As noted in Section IV.D.1 of this
document, the EPA has already
approved a 15-percent ROP plan for the
Coachella Valley in our prior action on
SCAQMD’s submittal for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS; 101 therefore, we find that the
District and CARB have met the ROP
requirement for this area.
Based on our review of the emissions
inventory documentation in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, 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, and that the District and
CARB have used an appropriate
calculation method to demonstrate RFP.
For these reasons, we have determined
that the Plan demonstrates RFP in the
2023 attainment year, consistent with
applicable CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. We therefore propose to
approve the Extreme RFP demonstration
99 80
FR 12264, 12274.
CFR 51.1110(a)(7) and 51.1310(a)(7).
for the Coachella Valley for the 1997
ozone NAAQS under CAA sections
172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) and 40
CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
E. Vehicle Miles Travelled Offset
Demonstration
1. Requirements for a VMT Offset
Demonstration
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a
state to submit a revision for each area
classified as Severe or above to identify
and adopt specific enforceable
transportation control strategies (TCSs)
and TCMs to offset growth in emissions
from growth in VMT or numbers of
vehicle trips in such area. CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) also requires the SIP to
attain reductions in motor vehicle
emissions consistent with RFP
demonstrations; and to implement
measures as necessary to demonstrate
attainment. We refer to CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) as the ‘‘VMT offset
requirement.’’ The VMT offset
requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley
under the EPA’s anti-backsliding rules
101 82
FR 26854.
100 40
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26830
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
that apply once a standard has been
revoked.102
In response to the Ninth Circuit Court
of Appeals’ decision in Association of
Irritated Residents v. EPA,103 we 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’’).104 The
August 2012 Guidance discusses the
meaning of the terms TCSs and TCMs,
and recommends that both TCSs and
TCMs be included in the emissions
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 strategy.’’ 105 TCM
is defined at 40 CFR 51.100(r) to mean
‘‘any measure that is directed toward
reducing emissions of air pollutants
from transportation sources,’’ including,
but not limited to, measures listed in
CAA section 108(f), and generally refers
to programs intended to reduce the
VMT, the 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, trip reduction
ordinances, and similar measures.
The August 2012 Guidance also
explains how states may demonstrate
that the VMT offset requirement is
satisfied in conformance with the
Court’s ruling. In the approach
recommended by the August 2012
Guidance, states develop one emission
inventory estimate for the base year, and
three different emissions inventory
scenarios for the attainment year. Two
of these scenarios would represent
hypothetical emissions scenarios that
would provide the basis to identify the
102 40 CFR 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(10).
103 632 F.3d. 584, 596–597 (9th Cir. 2011),
reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d
668, further amended February 13, 2012 (ruling
additional TCMs 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).
104 EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
‘‘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,’’ EPA–420–B–12–053, August 2012.
105 See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
‘‘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. The August
2012 Guidance contains specific details
on how states might conduct the
calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions
inventory should be based on 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 the 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,
representing a no action scenario.
Emissions in the attainment year in this
scenario may be lower than those in the
base year due to fleet turnover to loweremitting vehicles. Emissions may also
be higher if VMT and/or vehicle trips
are projected to sufficiently increase in
the attainment year.
The second of the attainment year
emissions calculations would also
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs
beyond those already credited have
been put in place since the base year
and would also assume no growth in
VMT and trips between the base year
and attainment year. Like the no-action
attainment year estimate described
previously, emissions in the attainment
year may be lower than those in the base
year due to fleet turnover, but the
emissions would not be influenced by
any growth in VMT or trips. This
emissions estimate, the VMT offset
ceiling scenario, would reflect the
maximum attainment emissions that
should be allowed to occur under the
statute as interpreted by the Ninth
Circuit 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
These two hypothetical status quo
estimates are necessary steps in
identifying target emission levels.
Comparison of the first two attainment
year calculations would identify
whether there was a hypothetical
growth in emissions due to growth in
VMT that needs to be offset, and as a
result whether further TCMs or TCSs
beyond those that have been adopted
and implemented are needed.
The third calculation incorporates 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 that were
put in place after the baseline year. 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
hypothetical growth in emissions
identified by comparison of the first two
attainment year calculations.
If the projected actual attainment year
emissions are greater than the VMT
offset ceiling 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
meet the VMT emissions offset
requirement of section 182(d)(1)(A) as
interpreted by the Ninth Circuit, the
additional TCSs or TCMs would need to
offset the growth in emissions and bring
the actual emissions down to at least the
same level as the attainment year VMT
offset ceiling estimate in the second
attainment year calculation.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Offset
Demonstration
The VMT Offset Demonstration uses
EMFAC2017 to estimates on-road
emissions. EMFAC2017 was the latest
EPA-approved motor vehicle emissions
model for California available at the
time the VMT Offset Demonstration was
prepared.106 The EMFAC2017 results,
106 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 at that
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26831
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
however, were adjusted based on a
sensitivity analysis using older
previously approved EMFAC models,
EMFAC2011 and EMFAC2014. As the
VMT Offset Demonstration explains,
several post-2002 emissions control
measures are factored into EMFAC2017
and cannot be removed. To correct this,
the VMT Offset Demonstration included
the results of a sensitivity analysis to
determine the emissions reductions
associated with CARB’s Advanced
Clean Cars I program 107 and the Truck
and Bus Regulations 108 with
EMFAC2014, and the additional
stringency of CARB’s I/M programs 109
calculated using EMFAC2011.110
All of the EMFAC models calculate
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
models combine trip-based VMT data
and speed distribution from the 2016–
2040 RTP/SCS, along with vehicle data
from the California Department of Motor
Vehicles and the 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. As such, emissions from these
processes are directly related to VMT
and vehicle trips, and the State included
emissions from them in the calculations
that provide the basis for the revised
Coachella Valley VMT Offset
Demonstration.111 Resting and diurnal
losses occur independently of vehicle
activity were and not considered in the
demonstration.112
The VMT Offset Demonstration also
includes the previously described three
attainment year scenarios (i.e., no new
measures; no VMT Growth or VMT
offset ceiling; and projected actual) for
2023. Table 5 summarizes the emissions
estimates for the base year and the three
scenarios.
TABLE 5—VMT OFFSET INVENTORY SCENARIOS AND RESULTS FOR THE 1997 8-HOUR OZONE STANDARDS a
VMT
Scenario
1000 miles/
day
Year
Base Year ........................................................................................................
No New Measures ...........................................................................................
No New Measures and No VMT Growth (VMT Offset Ceiling) ......................
Projected Actual ...............................................................................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
a Source:
2002
2023
2002
2023
11,091
14,508
11,091
14,508
Controls
VOC
Emissions
Year
tpd
2002
2002
2002
2018
8.5
2.8
2.0
1.9
Coachella Valley VMT Offset Demonstration, Table 1.
For the base year scenario, CARB ran
the EMFAC2017 model for the 2002 RFP
base year using VMT and starts data
corresponding to those years. For the no
new measures scenario, CARB estimated
2023 on-road vehicle emissions using
EMFAC2017, considering the estimated
increase in VMT,113 but adding 0.33 tpd
to account for the additional reductions
associated with the Advanced Clean
Cars I program, Truck and Bus
Regulation, and I/M programs that are
not creditable reductions in these
calculations. Likewise, CARB added
0.25 tpd to the VMT offset ceiling to
account for the same factors.
For the VMT offset ceiling scenario,
the State ran the EMFAC2011 model for
the attainment year but with VMT and
starts data corresponding to base year
values. Like the no action scenario, the
EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to
reflect VOC emissions levels in the
attainment year without the benefits of
the on-road motor vehicle control
programs implemented after the base
year. Thus, the VMT offset ceiling
scenario reflects hypothetical VOC
emissions if the State had not put in
place any TCSs or TCMs after the base
year and if there had been no growth in
VMT or vehicle trips between the base
year and the attainment year. As shown
in Table 5, CARB estimates VMT offset
ceiling VOC emissions to be 2.0 tpd in
2023.
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 estimate for the VMT
offset ceiling scenario. Based on the
values in Table 5, the hypothetical
growth in emissions due to growth in
VMT and trips in the Coachella Valley
would have been 0.8 tpd (i.e., 2.8 tpd
minus 2.0 tpd). This hypothetical
difference establishes the level of
emissions caused by growth in VMT
that need to be offset by the
combination of post-baseline year TCMs
time, in a rulemaking published at 84 FR 41717
(August 15, 2019).
107 The EPA approved the Advanced Clean Car
program in the California SIP on June 16, 2016 (81
FR 39424).
108 The EPA approved the Truck and Bus Rule
into the California SIP on April 4, 2012 (77 FR
20308).
109 The EPA approved California’s I/M program
into the California SIP on July 1, 2010 (75 FR
38023).
110 Two other control programs started after 2002,
the Heavy-Duty Greenhouse Gas Regulation and
Low Carbon Fuel Standard, have no impact on VOC
emissions. VMT Offset Demonstration, p. 9, n. 9.
111 VMT Offset Demonstration, p. 2.
112 This fact is noted in several locations of the
VMT Offset Demonstration, e.g., p. 10.
113 This estimate included an additional 0.33 tpd
based on the sensitivity analysis conducted with
the EMFAC2011 and EMFAC2014 models to
account for the EMFAC reductions for CARB’s
Advanced Clean Cars I program, Truck and Bus
Regulation, and I/M programs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and TCSs and any necessary additional
TCMs and TCSs.
For the projected actual scenario
calculation, the State included the
emissions benefits from TCSs and TCMs
put in place since the base year.114 In
addition to the measures already
discussed, a full list of CARB mobile
source regulations from 1990 through
the Plan’s development appears in
Attachment A–1 of the VMT Offset
Demonstration. While some of these
measures were adopted prior to 2002,
all or part of their implementation
occurred after 2002. CARB determined
the area complied with the VMT Offset
Demonstration because actual emissions
did not exceed the VMT offset ceiling
scenario calculation, in accordance with
EPA guidance.115
3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the VMT
Offset Demonstration
CARB’s VMT Offset Demonstration
uses a 2002 RFP base year. This is the
same year used for the Coachella Valley
114 As described in Section IV.B.2.c of this
document, the TCMs are focused in the South Coast
Air Basin, which heavily influences air quality in
the Coachella Valley due to the downwind
transport.
115 EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
‘‘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,’’ EPA–420–B–12–053, August 2012.
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26832
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Severe area VMT offset demonstration
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,116 it
corresponds to the Plan’s baseline year
for the RFP emissions inventory, and we
find it appropriate for this
demonstration.117 Further, we find
CARB’s methodology incorporating
sensitivity analysis to adjust for the
periodic change in emissions control
measures and the omission of resting
and diurnal emissions appropriate.
As shown in Table 5, the VMT Offset
Demonstration projects actual 2023
attainment-year VOC emissions of 1.9
tpd in the Coachella Valley, which is
less than the VMT offset ceiling scenario
value of 2.0 tpd. Therefore, the VMT
Offset Demonstration shows that
existing measures are sufficient to offset
the increase due solely to VMT and
additional trips, consistent with the
methodology in the EPA’s August 2012
Guidance, and that no new TCMs or
TCSs are required for the area. We are
proposing to approve the VMT Offset
Demonstration.
F. Clean Fuels or Advanced Control
Technology for Boilers
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
Section 182(e)(3) of the CAA provides
that SIPs for Extreme nonattainment
areas require each new, modified, and
existing electric utility and industrial
and commercial boiler that emits more
than 25 tpy of NOX to either burn as its
primary fuel natural gas, methanol, or
ethanol (or a comparably low-polluting
fuel), or use advanced control
technology, such as catalytic control
technologies or other comparably
effective control methods.
Additional guidance on this
requirement is provided in the General
Preamble.118 In the General Preamble,
the EPA states that, for the purposes of
CAA section 182(a)(3), a boiler should
generally be considered as any
combustion equipment used to produce
steam and generally does not include a
process heater that transfers heat from
combustion gases to process streams.119
In addition, boilers with rated heat
inputs less than 15 million British
thermal units (MMBtu) per hour that are
oil- or gas-fired may generally be
considered de minimis and exempt from
these requirements because it is
116 81
FR 75764, 75779.
2002 RFP base year is also consistent with
the approach described in the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule—Phase 2. See 70 FR 71612,
71632.
118 57 FR 13498, 13523.
119 57 FR 13498, 13523.
117 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
unlikely that they will exceed the 25 tpy
NOX emission limit.120
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
discusses compliance with the
requirements of CAA section 182(e)(3)
by reference to SCAQMD Rules 1146
(‘‘Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from
Industrial, Institutional, and
Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators,
and Process Heaters’’) and 1135
(‘‘Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from
Electricity Generating Facilities’’).121
These rules require the best available
retrofit control technology (BARCT) for
existing boilers. New or modified
sources with emissions increases are
subject to California best available
control technology (BACT)
requirements, which are comparable to
the federal lowest achievable emissions
rate (LAER) requirements for major
sources as defined in CAA section
171(3). Accordingly, the Plan concludes
that no additional action is needed to
satisfy the CAA section 182(e)(3)
requirement for the Coachella Valley’s
reclassification to Extreme.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
In our previous evaluation of the 2016
AQMP, which includes a similar
documentation of compliance with CAA
182(e)(3), we determined that SCAQMD
Rules 1303, 1146, and 2004 satisfy the
clean fuel or advanced control
technology for boilers requirement in
CAA section 182(e)(3) for the South
Coast Air Basin.122 For similar reasons,
we find that the requirements for new,
modified, and existing boilers in
approved SCAQMD Rules 1303, 1146,
and 2004 satisfy the clean fuel or
advanced control technology for boilers
requirement in CAA section 182(e)(3),
and based on this finding, we propose
to find the State has demonstrated that
these requirements are met for the
Coachella Valley for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
G. Other CAA Requirements
1. Contingency Measures
Under the CAA, ozone nonattainment
areas classified under subpart 2 as
Serious or above must include in their
SIPs contingency measures consistent
with sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9).
CAA section 172(c)(9) requires states
with nonattainment areas to provide for
the implementation of specific measures
to be undertaken if the area fails to make
RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the
at 13524.
Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6–31.
122 84 FR 28132, 28164.
applicable attainment date. Such
measures must be included in the SIP as
contingency measures to take effect in
any such case without further action by
the state or the EPA. CAA section
182(c)(9) requires states to provide
contingency measures in the event that
an ozone nonattainment area fails to
meet any applicable RFP milestone.
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.
In March 2023, the EPA announced a
new draft guidance addressing the
contingency measures requirement of
section 172(c)(9), entitled ‘‘DRAFT:
Guidance on the Preparation of State
Implementation Plan Provisions that
Address the Nonattainment Area
Contingency Measure Requirements for
Ozone and Particulate Matter,’’ and
provided an opportunity for public
comment.123 The principal differences
between this draft revised guidance and
previous existing guidance on
contingency measures relate to the
EPA’s recommendations concerning the
specific amount of emissions reductions
that implementation of contingency
measures should achieve, and the
timing for when the emissions
reductions from the contingency
measures should occur.
The Plan explains that the District
intends to amend SCAQMD Rule 445,
‘‘Wood Burning Devices,’’ to include
potential contingency provisions for
Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards.124 To date, the EPA
has not received a submittal to address
the 1997 ozone contingency measures
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9) for the Coachella Valley.
The EPA is not proposing action on the
Coachella Valley contingency measures
requirement for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
in this rulemaking.
2. CAA Section 185 Fees
Under sections 182(d)(3), (e), and (f)
and 185 of the Act, states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Severe
or Extreme are required to submit a
revision to the SIP that would require
major stationary sources of VOC or NOX
to pay a fee upon a failure to attain by
the applicable attainment date. Under
CAA section 185, this fee is calculated
as $5,000 in 1990 dollars, adjusted for
inflation, for every ton emitted by the
source during the calendar year in
excess of 80 percent of the source’s
120 Id
121 Coachella
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
123 88
FR 17571 (March 23, 2023).
Valley Ozone Plan p. 6–30.
124 Coachella
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
actual emissions in the applicable
attainment year.125
While the EPA has approved
SCAQMD Rule 317 into the SIP for the
1-hour ozone standards, the SCAQMD
has not submitted a rule to address the
requirement of CAA section 185 for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards. We are
aware, however, that the SCAQMD is
working to create to a rule to address
this requirement, SCAQMD Rule 317.1,
‘‘Clean Air Act Nonattainment Fees for
the 8-Hour Ozone Standards.’’ The
SCAQMD has prepared a draft rule and
held a workshop to discuss it on
November 7, 2023.126 The EPA is not
proposing action on the CAA Section
185 fee requirement for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in this rulemaking.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
3. New Source Review Rules
Section 182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA
requires states to develop SIP revisions
containing permit programs for each
ozone nonattainment area. These SIP
revisions must 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.127 In addition, CAA
section 182(e)(1) requires the permitting
offset ratios for volatile organic
compound and NOX for major sources
and modifications in an Extreme
nonattainment area to be at least 1.5 to
1, or at least 1.2 to 1 if the plan requires
all existing major sources in the
nonattainment area to use the best
available control technology. SCAQMD
Rule 1302, ‘‘Definitions,’’ and Rule
2000, ‘‘General’’ (part of the RECLAIM
regulations), have been submitted to
address these requirements.128 The EPA
has not yet acted on this submittal.
4. Clean Fuels for Fleets
Section 182(c)(4)(A) of the CAA
requires states to submit SIP revisions to
implement the clean-fuel vehicle
program for fleets described at CAA
section 246 (‘‘Clean Fuels Fleet
Program’’) in each ozone nonattainment
area classified as Serious and above.
Section 182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows
states to opt out of the federal Clean
Fuels Fleet Program by submitting a SIP
revision consisting of a program or
programs that will result in at least
equivalent long-term reductions in
125 CAA
section 185(a) and (b).
126 https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-
compliance/rules/scaqmd-rule-book/proposedrules/rule-317-and-317-1.
127 See also CAA section 182(e).
128 Letter dated February 12, 2021, from Richard
W. Corey, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, EPA Region IX
(submitted electronically on February 12, 2021).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
26833
ozone precursors and toxic air
emissions.
In 1994, CARB submitted a SIP
revision to the EPA to opt out of the
Clean Fuels 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, 1999.129
Recent EPA guidance for the 2008 and
2015 ozone standards 130 identifies
several methods to demonstrate
compliance with the Clean Fuels Fleet
Program requirement. Among them, a
state may submit a certification SIP
revision if it has ‘‘an approved [Clean
Fuels Fleet Program] or substitute
measure(s) that it is continuing to
implement, and the state does not plan
to make any changes to the program or
substitute measure(s).’’ 131 Consistent
with this guidance, the EPA approved
the ‘‘California Clean Fuels for Fleets
Certification for the 70 ppb (2015)
Ozone Standard,’’ which included
Coachella Valley, in a final rule dated
May 25, 2023.132 However, because the
Plan does not contain a certification for
the 1997 ozone standards, the EPA is
taking no action regarding this
requirement as part of this action.
the PAMS SIP revision met all
applicable requirements for enhanced
monitoring and approved the PAMS
submittal into the California SIP.135
Appendix B, ‘‘Enhanced Ozone
Monitoring Plan,’’ of the District’s FiveYear Monitoring Network Assessment,
dated June 1, 2020, describes the
District’s plan to address the
requirements of section 182(c)(1).136
The EPA has approved the District’s
review, including the Enhanced Ozone
Monitoring Plan in a letter dated
October 28, 2020.137
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 58.138
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.139 Therefore, based on
our review and approval of the 2020
Five-Year Network Monitoring
Assessment we find the District has
adequately addressed the enhanced
monitoring requirements under CAA
section 182(c)(1) for the Coachella
Valley.
5. Enhanced 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, 1993.133
On November 10, 1993, CARB
submitted to the EPA a SIP revision
addressing the PAMS network for six
ozone nonattainment areas in California,
including the Southeast Desert, to meet
the enhanced monitoring requirements
of CAA section 182(c)(1) and the PAMS
regulations.134 The EPA determined that
6. Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Programs
Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires
states with ozone nonattainment areas
classified as Serious or above to
implement an enhanced motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance program in
those areas. The requirements for those
programs are provided in CAA section
182(c)(3) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
The EPA approved the State of
California’s SIP revision addressing this
requirement in a final rule dated July 1,
2010.140
V. Environmental Justice
Considerations
We expect that this proposed action,
if approved, will generally be neutral or
contribute to a reduction in adverse
environmental and health impacts on all
135 82
129 64
FR 46849 (August 27, 1999).
130 EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
‘‘Guidance for Fulfilling the Clean Fuel Fleets
Requirement of the Clean Air Act,’’ EPA–420–B–
22–027, June 2022.
131 Id. at 8.
132 88 FR 33830.
133 58 FR 8452 (February 12, 1993).
134 In the designation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
nonattainment areas, the Southeast Desert was split
into the Los Angeles and San Bernardino (Western
Mojave Desert) and Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FR 45191 (September 28, 2017).
dated June 26, 2020, from Rene
Bermudez, SCAQMD, to Jennifer Williams, EPA
Region IX, transmitting the District’s Five-Year
Monitoring Network Assessment.
137 Letter dated October 28, 2020, from Gwen
Yoshimura, EPA Region IX, to Matt Miyasato,
SCAQMD.
138 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006).
139 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.’’
140 75 FR 38023.
136 Letter
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
26834
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
populations in the Coachella Valley,
including people of color and lowincome populations in the area. At a
minimum, the approved action would
not worsen any existing air quality and
is expected to ensure the area is meeting
requirements to attain air quality
standards. Further, there is no
information in the record indicating that
this action is expected to have
disproportionately high or adverse
human health or environmental effects
on a particular group of people. In
responding to public concerns about
environmental justice in eastern
Coachella Valley, the Plan notes that (1)
Assembly Bill 617 funding has reduced
pollutant emissions in Eastern
Coachella Valley by 63.1 tpy of NOX, 7.5
tpy of VOC, and 5.3 tpy of diesel
particulate matter,141 and (2) the
SCAQMD has provided $966,667 in
energy efficiency upgrades, reducing
energy costs for homes within
designated environmental justice areas
of Indio and Eastern Coachella
Valley.142 The 2016 AQMP also
identifies an Environmental Justice
Advisory Group established to ‘‘advise
and assist SCAQMD in protecting and
improving public health in SCAQMD’s
most impacted communities through the
reduction and prevention of air
pollution.’’ 143
VI. The EPA’s Proposed Action and
Public Comment
For the reasons discussed in this
document, the EPA is proposing to
approve the California’s SIP submittal
for the Coachella Valley addressing the
Extreme nonattainment areas for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is
proposing to approve the following
elements of SCAQMD’s ‘‘Final
Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for
1997 8 Hour Ozone Standard,’’ dated
December 2020, under CAA section
110(k)(3):
1. The RACM demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17);
2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations
as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and
40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4);
and
3. The attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA
141 Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 9–8.
SCAQMD’s website identifies Assembly Bill 617
Community Air Initiatives as ‘‘community based
efforts that focus on improving air quality and
public health in environmental justice
communities.’’ See https://www.aqmd.gov/nav/
about/initiatives/environmental-justice/ab617-134.
142 Id.
143 2016 AQMP p. 9–7.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12).
The EPA is also proposing to approve
CARB’s ‘‘2020 Coachella Valley Vehicle
Miles Traveled Emissions Offset
Demonstration,’’ release date January
22, 2022. The demonstration provides
for transportation control strategies and
measures sufficient to offset any growth
in emissions from growth in VMT or the
number of vehicle trips, and to provide
for RFP and attainment, as meeting the
requirements of CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1)
and 51.1100(o)(10). Additionally, we are
proposing to find that the State has
satisfied the clean fuel or advanced
control technology for boilers
requirement in CAA section 182(e)(3)
for the Coachella Valley for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. The EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. We will
accept comments from the public on
this action for the next 30 days. We will
consider these comments before taking
final action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it proposes to approve a state
program;
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• 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.
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 action
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).
Furthermore, Executive Order 12898,
‘‘Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994), directs Federal agencies to
identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA
further defines the term fair treatment to
mean that ‘‘no group of people should
bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The State did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. However, as described in
Section IV of this document, the District
has taken measures to address
environmental justice concerns within
the Coachella Valley. The EPA did not
perform an EJ analysis and did not
consider EJ in this action. Due to the
nature of this proposed action, if
finalized, this action is expected to have
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 16, 2024 / Proposed Rules
a neutral to positive impact on the air
quality of Coachella Valley.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of Executive Order
12898, to achieve environmental justice
for people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental
regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: April 9, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024–08121 Filed 4–15–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–0408; FRL–7821–02–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AU78
Petition To Remove the Stationary
Combustion Turbines Source Category
From the List of Categories of Major
Sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notification of denial of petition
to delist.
AGENCY:
The U.S Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing
the Agency’s decision to deny a petition
requesting the removal of the Stationary
Combustion Turbines source category
from the list of categories of major
sources of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) subject to regulation the Clean
Air Act (CAA). The petition was
submitted jointly by American Fuel &
Petrochemical Manufacturers, the
American Petroleum Institute, the
American Public Power Association, the
Gas Turbine Association, the Interstate
Natural Gas Association of America, and
the National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association (‘‘the petitioners’’). The
EPA is denying the petition based on
the EPA’s determination that the
petition is incomplete and because we
have found that the submitted
information is inadequate to determine
that no source in the category emits
HAP in quantities that may cause a
lifetime risk of cancer greater than 1-in-
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 15, 2024
Jkt 262001
1 million to the individual in the
population who is most exposed to
emissions of such pollutants from the
source. We have reached this decision
based on review of the risk analysis and
other information submitted by
petitioners and on consideration of
turbine testing results received from a
CAA information request. The EPA is
denying the petition with prejudice and
will deny any future petition to delist as
a matter of law unless such future
petition is accompanied by substantial
new information or analysis.
DATES: Petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed June 17, 2024.
See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
filing information.
ADDRESSES: In addition to being
available in the docket, an electronic
copy of this action is available on the
internet. Following signature, the EPA
will post a copy of this action at https://
www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-airpollution/stationary-combustionturbines-national-emission-standards.
Following publication in the Federal
Register, the EPA will post the Federal
Register version of this action at this
same website.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this action contact Ms.
Angela M. Ortega, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (D243–01), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
P.O. Box 12055, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: (919) 541–4197; and email
address: ortega.angela@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–0408.1 All
documents in the docket are listed in
https://www.regulations.gov. Although
listed, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy. With the
1 As explained in a memorandum to the docket,
the docket for this action includes the documents
and information in Docket ID Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2017–0688 (Stationary Combustion Turbines
NESHAP Risk and Technology Review), EPA–HQ–
OAR–2003–0196 (Proposal to stay the enforcement
of the combustion turbines National Emission
Standards Hazardous Air Pollutants for new sources
in the lean premix gas-fired turbines and diffusion
flame gas-fired turbines subcategories), EPA–HQ–
OAR–2003–0189 (Proposal to delist four
subcategories from the Stationary Combustion
Turbines source category), and EPA–HQ–OAR–
2002–0060 (National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Combustion
Turbines).
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26835
exception of such material, publicly
available docket materials are available
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov.
Judicial review. Section 307(b)(1) of
the CAA governs judicial review of final
actions by the EPA. This section
provides, in part, that petitions for
review must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit: (i) when the
Agency action consists of ‘‘nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or
final actions taken, by the
Administrator,’’ or (ii) when such action
is locally or regionally applicable, but
‘‘such action is based on a
determination of nationwide scope or
effect and if in taking such action the
Administrator finds and publishes that
such action is based on such a
determination.’’ For locally or regionally
applicable final actions, the CAA
reserves to the EPA complete discretion
to decide whether to invoke the
exception in (ii).2
This final action is ‘‘nationally
applicable’’ within the meaning of CAA
section 307(b)(1). In this final action, the
Administrator is denying a petition to
delist the entire Stationary Combustion
Turbines source category under CAA
section 112(c)(9)(B). This action results
in the continued applicability of the
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Stationary Combustion Turbines to all
turbines meeting the rule’s applicability
criteria located in any state in the
nation. For these reasons, this final
action is nationally applicable.
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 District of
Columbia Circuit within 60 days from
April 16, 2024. Filing a petition for
reconsideration of this final action by
the Administrator does not affect the
finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review, nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial
review must be filed and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action.
Under CAA section 307(b)(2) (42
U.S.C. 7607(b)(2)), the requirements
established by this final action may not
be challenged separately in any civil or
criminal proceedings brought by the
EPA to enforce the requirements.
2 Sierra Club v. EPA, 47 F.4th 738, 745 (D.C. Cir.
2022) (‘‘EPA’s decision whether to make and
publish a finding of nationwide scope or effect is
committed to the agency’s discretion and thus is
unreviewable’’); Texas v. EPA, 983 F.3d 826, 834–
35 (5th Cir. 2020).
E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM
16APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 16, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26817-26835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08121]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0448; FRL-11677-01-R9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; Coachella Valley; Extreme Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for the
1997 8-hour ozone
[[Page 26818]]
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the
Riverside County (Coachella Valley), CA nonattainment area (``Coachella
Valley''). These SIP revisions address the ``Extreme'' nonattainment
area requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, including the
requirements for the attainment demonstration, reasonable further
progress demonstration, and reasonably available control measures
demonstration, among others.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0448 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. 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. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with a disability
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: Tom Kelly, Geographic Strategies and
Modeling Section (AIR-2-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, (415) 972-3856, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley
Nonattainment Area
A. Background on the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
B. The Coachella Valley 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Area
SIPs
III. CARB's SIP Submittals To Address the Extreme Requirements for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in the Coachella Valley
A. CARB's SIP Submittals
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP
Submittals
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and
Adopted Control Strategy
C. Attainment Demonstration
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstrations
E. Vehicle Miles Travelled Offset Demonstration
F. Clean Fuels or Advanced Control Technology for Boilers
G. Other CAA Requirements
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. The EPA's Proposed Action and Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley
Nonattainment Area
A. Background on the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution 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 uses the term Reactive Organic Gases
(ROG) rather than VOC 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 simplicity, we refer to this set of gases as
VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Health effects associated with exposure to ground-level ozone
include: reduced lung function, making it more difficult for people to
breathe as deeply and vigorously as normal; irritated airways, causing
coughing, sore or scratchy throat, pain when taking a deep breath and
shortness of breath; increased frequency of asthma attacks;
inflammation of and damage to the lining of the lung; increased
susceptibility to respiratory infection; and aggravation of chronic
lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. Ozone may
continue to cause lung damage even when the symptoms have disappeared
and breathing ozone may contribute to premature death, especially in
people with heart and lung disease.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA, ``Fact Sheet, Final Revisions to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' March 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1979, under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (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 8-hour ozone standards'').\4\ The EPA set the
1997 8-hour ozone standards based on scientific evidence demonstrating
that ozone causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and
over longer periods of time than was understood when the previous 1-
hour ozone standards were set. The EPA determined that the 1997 8-hour
standards would be more protective of human health, especially for
children and adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with a
pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma. The 8-hour ozone
standards were further strengthened in 2008 and 2015.\5\ Although the
1979 1-hour ozone standards and the 1997 8-hour ozone standards have
subsequently been revoked following the promulgation of more stringent
ozone standards, certain requirements that had applied under the
revoked standards continue to apply under the anti-backsliding
provisions of CAA section 172(e), including an approved attainment
plan.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
\4\ 62 FR 38856.
\5\ In 2008, the EPA revised and strengthened the NAAQS for
ozone by setting the acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at
0.075 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period. 73 FR 16436 (March 27,
2008). In 2015, the EPA further tightened the 8-hour ozone standards
to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). The EPA has approved
most elements of the 2008 ozone attainment plan for the Coachella
Valley. 85 FR 57714 (September 16, 2020). The EPA has yet to act on
the Coachella Valley attainment plan for the 2015 ozone NAAQS,
submitted electronically on February 23, 2023. This action applies
only to the 1997 8-hour ozone standards and does not address
requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone standards.
\6\ 80 FR 12264, 12296 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Coachella Valley 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as
attaining or not attaining the standards. Effective June 15, 2004, the
EPA designated nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards.\7\ The designations and classifications for
[[Page 26819]]
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for California areas are codified at 40
CFR 81.305. In a rule governing certain facets of implementation of the
1997 8-hour ozone standards (the ``Phase 1 Rule''), the EPA classified
the Coachella Valley as ``Serious'' nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards, with an attainment date no later than June 15,
2013.\8\ On November 28, 2007, the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) requested that the EPA reclassify the Coachella Valley 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area from Serious to ``Severe-15.'' The EPA
granted the reclassification, effective June 4, 2010, with an
attainment date of not later than June 15, 2019.\9\ On June 11, 2019,
CARB requested another reclassification for the Coachella Valley, from
Severe-15 to ``Extreme'' nonattainment, which the EPA granted in a
final rule published July 10, 2019.\10\ This reclassification to
Extreme applied only to the portions of the Coachella Valley subject to
state jurisdiction. At this time, areas of Indian country within the
nonattainment area remain classified as Severe-15 for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards.\11\ On January 15, 2020, we published a final rule
setting a deadline of February 20, 2021, for the state to submit a SIP
revision addressing the Extreme requirements of CAA section 182(e) and
the revised title V and new source review rules for the Coachella
Valley.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004).
\8\ Id. at 23885 and 23886.
\9\ 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
\10\ 84 FR 32841 (July 10, 2019).
\11\ Id.; see also 40 CFR 81.305.
\12\ 85 FR 2311 (January 15, 2020). See also proposal at 84 FR
44801 (August 27, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously approved many elements of the Coachella Valley's
Severe attainment plan in a final rule dated June 12, 2017,\13\
including the reasonably available control measure (RACM) demonstration
as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17); the rate of progress (ROP) and
reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstrations as meeting the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4); the attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12); and the demonstration that the SIP
submittal provides for transportation control strategies and measures
sufficient to offset any growth in emissions from growth in vehicle
miles travelled (VMT) or the number of vehicle trips, and to provide
for RFP and attainment, as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). The EPA did
not act on the contingency measures submitted with the Severe-15
attainment plan, which were subsequently withdrawn by CARB, and we did
not act on the motor vehicle emissions budgets, because the associated
transportation conformity demonstration is not required for a revoked
NAAQS. The EPA also approved the Enhanced motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program for the Coachella Valley in a final rule
published on July 1, 2010.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 82 FR 26854.
\14\ 75 FR 38023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coachella Valley area is located within Riverside County.\15\
The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD or ``District''), which also
oversees air quality in the upwind South Coast Air Basin. The District
and CARB are responsible for adopting and submitting plans to attain
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for nonattainment areas in their
jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ For a precise description of the geographic boundaries of
the area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground level ozone in the Coachella Valley ``is both directly
transported from the [South Coast Air Basin] and formed photochemically
from precursors emitted upwind and within the Coachella Valley.'' \16\
The South Coast Air Basin is home to a much larger population than
Coachella Valley and, based on inventory data from 2018, emissions of
NOX and VOC in the South Coast Air Basin are more than 20
times larger than those of Coachella Valley.\17\ Therefore, attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in Coachella Valley is heavily
dependent on upwind reductions in the South Coast Air Basin. The
largest sources of precursors are at the coastal and central portions
of South Coast Air Basin. The area's prevailing winds transport ozone
precursors inland, forming ozone along the way. Maximum ozone
concentrations occur ``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.'' \18\ As
pollution is further transported through the San Gorgonio Pass into the
Coachella Valley, ozone concentrations typically decrease from dilution
with cleaner air, but ozone standards are still exceeded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ SCAQMD, ``Final Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the
1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard,'' dated December 2020, (``Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan''), p. 2-1.
\17\ Id. at 3-13.
\18\ Id. at 2-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air quality in the Coachella Valley has steadily improved in recent
years. Design values have declined from 0.108 ppm in 2003 to 0.087 ppm
in 2022.\19\ Design values are used to designate and classify
nonattainment areas, as well as to assess progress towards meeting the
air quality standards.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ EPA, Design Values Report for the Joshua Tree National
Monument, Indio, and Palm Springs monitors for 2021, 2021, and 2022,
March 8, 2023, and contained in the docket for this proposed action.
\20\ For more information about ozone design values, see 40 CFR
50, Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs
States must implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standards under Title
1, Part D of the CAA, which includes section 172, ``Nonattainment plan
provisions,'' and subpart 2, ``Additional Provisions for Ozone
Nonattainment Areas'' (sections 181-185).
To assist states in developing effective plans to address ozone
nonattainment, the EPA issued an implementation rule for the 1997 8-
hour ozone standards (``1997 Ozone Implementation Rule''). This rule
was finalized in two phases. The first phase of the rule addressed
classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards; applicable
attainment dates for the various classifications; the timing of
emissions reductions needed for attainment; and identified applicable
requirements, such as clean fuels for boilers.\21\ The second phase
addressed SIP submittal dates and the requirements for reasonably
available control technology (RACT) and RACM, RFP, modeling and
attainment demonstrations, contingency measures, and new source
review.\22\ The rule was codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart X.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
\22\ 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA announced the revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
and the anti-backsliding requirements that apply upon revocation in a
rulemaking that established final implementation rules for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.\23\ Under these anti-backsliding requirements, areas
that were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards at the time the standards were revoked continue to be subject
to certain SIP requirements that had previously applied based on area
classifications for the standards.\24\ Thus, although the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards have been revoked, the Coachella Valley remains subject
to
[[Page 26820]]
many requirements for these standards as applicable to ``Extreme''
nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 80 FR 12264.
\24\ Id. at 12296; 40 CFR 51.1105 and 51.1100(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We discuss the CAA and regulatory requirements for 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment plans in more detail in the following section of
this proposed rulemaking.
III. CARB's SIP Submittals To Address the Extreme Requirements for the
1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in the Coachella Valley
A. CARB's SIP Submittals
1. The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
On December 29, 2020, CARB submitted the ``Final Coachella Valley
Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard,'' dated December
2020 (``Coachella Valley Ozone Plan'' or ``Plan''), to the EPA as a
revision to the California SIP.\25\ The Plan addresses many of the
Extreme nonattainment area requirements for the Coachella Valley for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Letter dated December 28, 2020, from Richard W. Corey,
CARB, to John W. Busterud, EPA, Subject: ``Coachella Valley Extreme
Area Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard'' (submitted
electronically December 29, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan includes the District's resolution
of approval for the Plan (District Board Resolution 20-22) and the
executive order commemorating CARB's adoption of the Plan as a revision
to the California SIP (Executive Order S-20-34).\26\ The Plan addresses
the requirements for emissions inventory; RACM demonstration and
adopted control strategy; attainment demonstration; ROP and RFP
demonstrations; and clean fuels for boilers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ SCAQMD Board Resolution 20-22, December 4, 2020; Executive
Order S-20-34, ``Coachella Extreme Ozone Plan SIP Submittal,''
December 28, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan is organized into an executive summary, seven sections,
and three appendices. Section 1, ``Introduction,'' identifies the
nonattainment area and the nonattainment status for all EPA ozone
standards, including the 1997 8-hour ozone standards; provides a
history of air quality planning for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards;
and explains the purpose of the Plan. Section 2, ``Air Quality
Trends,'' describes the formation of ground-level ozone generally and
specific factors that contribute to ozone formation in the Coachella
Valley, and provides historic monitoring data and related discussion.
Section 3, ``Base Year and Future Year Emissions,'' describes the
methodology used for the area's emissions inventories, citing to the
``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan'' (``2016 AQMP'') \27\ where
appropriate, and discusses the modeled inventories in detail. Section
4, ``Control Strategy,'' describes District and CARB rules that will
achieve the emissions reductions relied upon in the Plan. Section 5,
``Future Air Quality,'' describes the modeling approach, including
inputs, assumptions, methodology, and weight of evidence analysis
(WOE). Section 6, ``Other Clean Air Act Requirements'' addresses
various Extreme area requirements, including for RFP, RACT, RACM,
contingency measures, offsetting of increases in VMT, NSR requirements,
use of clean fuels or advanced control technology for boilers, and
traffic control measures during heavy traffic hours. Sections 7 through
9 address various procedural requirements, including compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act, and notice and comment
procedures. The Plan includes three supporting appendices, which
describe the emissions inventories and existing District and CARB rules
and regulations relied on in the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ SCAQMD, ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan,'' dated
March 2017, submitted electronically by CARB to the EPA on April 27,
2017, and approved by the EPA on September 16, 2020 (85 FR 57714).
The 2016 AQMP includes a Coachella Valley attainment plan for the
2008 ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Offset Demonstration
On March 18, 2021,\28\ CARB submitted the ``VMT Offset
Demonstration.'' \29\ The VMT Offset Demonstration is intended to show
compliance with the requirement at CAA section 182(d)(1) for
nonattainment areas classified Severe or Extreme to adopt sufficient
transportation control strategies (TCSs) and transportation control
measures (TCMs) to offset any growth in VMT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Letter dated March 15, 2021, from Richard W. Corey, CARB,
to Deborah Jordan, EPA (submitted electronically March 18, 2021).
\29\ CARB, ``Staff Report, 2020 Coachella Valley Vehicle Miles
Traveled Emissions Offset Demonstration,'' January 22, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VMT Offset Demonstration contains an Executive Summary,
Introduction, Methodology, Staff Recommendations, and appendices. The
appendices contain the following sections: ``Sensitivity Test to
Estimate Emissions for the 2023 Attainment Year with Motor Vehicle
Control Program Frozen at 2002;'' ``EMFAC2014 Analysis;'' \30\
``EMFAC2011 Analysis;'' \31\ and ``Summary.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ EMFAC2014 is the 2014 version of CARB's Emissions Factor
model.
\31\ EMFAC2011 is the 2011 version of CARB's Emissions Factor
model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VMT Offset Demonstration includes a base year emissions
estimate and three different estimates for the 2023 attainment year.
One estimate has 2023 on-road vehicle emissions controls frozen as the
requirements existed in 2002. One estimate shows 2023 emissions
freezing the VMT at the levels from 2002. The final estimate reflects
expected emissions for 2023 based on the submitted control strategy,
which, as described further in Section IV.E of this document, must be
less than both previous estimates for 2023 for an adequate VMT offset
demonstration.
As the VMT Offset Demonstration explains, several post-2002
emissions control measures are factored into EMFAC2017 (the latest CARB
model for on-road emissions at the time the demonstration was prepared)
and cannot be removed. To correct this, the VMT Offset Demonstration
includes the results of a sensitivity analysis to determine the
emissions reductions associated with CARB's Advanced Clean Cars program
and the Truck and Bus Regulations (calculated using EMFAC2014), and the
additional stringency of CARB's inspection and maintenance programs
(calculated using EMFAC2011).
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP Submittals
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require a state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet
this requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that the
state provided adequate public notice and an opportunity for a public
hearing, consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR
51.102.
The SCAQMD provided public notice of its intent to approve the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan on November 4, 2020.\32\ The public comment
period ended with a public hearing on December 4, 2020; no comments
were submitted during the public hearing.\33\ The SCAQMD responded to
written comments in Section 9 of the Plan. The SCAQMD Governing Board
documented the adoption of the Plan in Board Resolution 20-22, dated
December 4, 2020. In addition to the comment period and hearing, the
SCAQMD convened several steering committees and advisory groups
beginning in August
[[Page 26821]]
2020.\34\ As documented in Executive Order S-20-34, CARB determined
that the Plan met the requirements of the Act, adopted the Plan, and
ordered it to be submitted to the EPA for inclusion in the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ SCAQMD, Proof of Publication for Notice of Public Hearing,
dated November 4, 2020.
\33\ SCAQMD, Draft Minutes of Public Hearing, dated December 4,
2020.
\34\ SCAQMD, Governing Board Package for the Coachella Valley
Extreme Area Plan, dated December 4, 2020, Public Process, page 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan includes proof of publication for the notice of the
District public hearings, as evidence that all hearings were properly
noticed. Therefore, we find the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan meets the
procedural requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
CARB provided public notice of its intent to approve the VMT Offset
Demonstration on January 21, 2021. The public comment period ended with
a board meeting on February 25, 2021. One person commented during the
public meeting, urging progress in addressing air pollution in the
Coachella Valley without directly addressing the VMT Offset
Demonstration. The CARB Governing Board documented the adoption of the
VMT Offset Demonstration in Board Resolution 21-1, dated February 25,
2021.
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that the EPA determine whether a
SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section of
the CAA also provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively
determined to be complete or incomplete is deemed complete by operation
of law six months after the date of submittal. The SIP submittal for
the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan became complete by operation of law on
June 28, 2021, and the submittal for the VMT Offset Demonstration
became complete by operation of law on September 18, 2021.
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
A. Emissions Inventories
1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each state with an ozone
nonattainment area classified under subpart 2 to submit a
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources'' of the relevant pollutants in accordance with guidance
provided by the Administrator. While this inventory is not a specific
requirement under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.1105 and
51.1100(o), it provides support for demonstrations required under these
anti-backsliding rules. Additionally, a baseline emissions inventory is
needed for the attainment demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. The 1997 Ozone Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as the
baseline year for RFP purposes.\35\ Emissions inventory guidance issued
by EPA sets specific planning requirements pertaining to future
milestone years for reporting RFP and to attainment demonstration
years.\36\ Key RFP analysis years in the RFP demonstration include 2008
and every subsequent 3 years until the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 69 FR 23951, 23980 (April 30, 2004).
\36\ 70 FR 71612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have evaluated the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan to determine if they are consistent with EPA guidance and
adequate to support the Plan's RACM, RFP, ROP, and attainment
demonstrations.
2. Emissions Inventories in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
Chapter 3 and Appendix I of the Plan contain detailed emissions
estimates. The District's process for developing these emissions
estimates followed a similar methodology to the inventories in the 2016
AQMP.\37\ In general, Appendix III of the 2016 AQMP includes a more
detailed discussion of this methodology, and the Plan explains relevant
differences between the two emissions estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 2016 AQMP, approved by the EPA on September 16, 2020 (85 FR
57714).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan's emissions estimates are seasonally adjusted to summer
emissions when ozone concentrations are highest. The Plan divides
emissions into the four categories of ``point,'' ``area,'' ``on-road,''
and ``off-road'' sources, with point and area sources grouped as
``stationary sources'' in summary tables. The base year for the
emissions estimates is 2018. As Chapter 3 of the Plan explains, that
data was projected to 2020 and 2023. Appendix I also contains full
emissions breakdowns projected back to 2002 (the baseline year for the
RFP demonstration), and forward to 2020 (a milestone year in the RFP
demonstration) and 2023 (the attainment year). Table 1 compares
emissions for 2002, 2018, 2020, and 2023.
Table 1--Coachella Valley NOX and VOC Emissions Inventory Summaries for 2002, 2018, and 2023
[Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC
Category ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2018 2020 2023 2002 2018 2020 2023
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combined Point and Area Sources................................. 1.40 1.59 1.14 1.18 7.63 7.18 7.74 8.32
On-Road Mobile Sources.......................................... 41.07 11.18 9.53 6.85 10.47 3.89 3.33 2.90
Other Mobile Sources............................................ 11.77 5.56 5.10 4.30 4.76 3.30 3.23 3.22
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals...................................................... 54.24 18.33 15.77 12.33 22.85 14.37 14.30 14.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Appendix I for 2002, Table 3-1 for 2018, and Table 3-2 for 2023.
As described in the Plan, SCAQMD Rule 301 requires stationary
sources emitting 4 tons per year (tpy) or more of NOX or VOC
to report facility emissions directly to the District.
Sources with NOX and VOC emissions below these
thresholds are classified as area sources. The area source category
includes aggregated emissions data from processes that are individually
small and widespread. CARB and SCAQMD jointly estimate emissions for
more than 400 area source categories. Appendix I of the Plan includes
aggregate categories, such as consumer products, but not every
individual category (e.g., hairspray). The Plan states that ``emissions
from these sources are estimated using specific activity information
and emission factors. Activity data are usually obtained from survey
data or scientific reports, e.g., Energy Information Administration
reports for fuel consumption other than natural gas fuel, Southern
California Gas Company for natural gas consumption, paint supplier data
under SCAQMD
[[Page 26822]]
Rule 314, `Fees for Architectural Coatings,' and District databases.''
\38\ Emission factors are values representing the amount of
NOX or VOC per amount of fuel, hours of operation, or some
other measurement. The Plan's emission factors are based on ``rule
compliance factors, source tests, manufacturer's product or technical
specification data, default factors (mostly from AP-42, the EPA's
published emission factor compilation), or weighted emission factors
derived from the point source facilities' annual emissions reports.''
\39\ Area source emissions are based on emissions projections for 2018
and 2023 from the 2016 AQMP, ``using growth and control factors derived
from regulatory and socio-economic data.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Id.
\39\ Id. at 3-2.
\40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For on-road mobile source emissions, which consists of emissions
from trucks, automobiles, buses, and motorcycles, the Plan uses the
vehicle activity from the ``2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/
Sustainable Communities Strategy'' (``2016-2040 RTP/SCS'') developed by
the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The Plan's
mobile source emission factors come from CARB's 2017 emissions factor
model, known as ``EMFAC2017,'' which was the latest model available for
estimating on-road motor vehicle emissions in California at the time of
its submission.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ EMFAC is short for EMission FACtor. The EPA announced the
availability of the EMFAC2017 model for use in state implementation
plan development and transportation conformity in California on
August 15, 2019. 84 FR 41717. The EPA's approval of the EMFAC2017
emissions model for SIP and conformity purposes was effective on the
date of publication of the notice in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan also contains off-road NOX and VOC inventories
developed by CARB using category-specific methods and models.\42\ The
off-road mobile source category includes aircraft, trains, ships, and
off-road vehicles and equipment used for construction, farming,
commercial, industrial, and recreational activities. The 2016 AQMP
provides the growth factors used to project base year emissions for the
off-road sources.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Detailed information on CARB's off-road motor vehicle
emissions inventory methodologies is found at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/msei-road-documentation.
\43\ 2016 AQMP, Appendix III, pp. III-1-24 to III-1-27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 2018 base year. Growth
factors used to project these baseline inventories are derived mainly
from data obtained from SCAG.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 2016 AQMP, 7-25, and Appendix III, p. III-2-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Proposed Action on the Emissions Inventories
We have reviewed the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and the inventory methodologies used by the District and
CARB for consistency with CAA section 182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We
find that the base year and projected attainment year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories of actual and
projected emissions of NOX and VOC in the Coachella Valley
as of the date of the submittal. Accordingly, we propose to find that
these inventories provide an appropriate basis for the various other
elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, including the RACM, ROP,
RFP, and attainment demonstrations. The technical support document
(TSD) accompanying this proposed rulemaking identifies SCAQMD rules
submitted to the EPA for SIP approval after submittal of the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan and compares emissions in the Plan with emissions in
the previously approved Severe attainment plan.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ EPA, Region IX, ``Technical Support Document, Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; Coachella
Valley; Extreme Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards,
Docket: EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0448, Additional Supporting Information for
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,'' March 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
1. RACM Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provide
for the implementation of all reasonable available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
The RACM demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply for revoked standards.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (``General Preamble'') \47\
and in a memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) Requirements and Attainment Demonstration Submissions
for the Ozone NAAQS,'' John Seitz, November 30, 1999 (``Seitz Memo'').
In summary, EPA guidance provides that 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.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 1992). The General
Preamble describes the EPA's preliminary view on how we would
interpret various SIP planning provisions in title I of the CAA as
amended in 1990, including those planning provisions applicable to
the 1-hour ozone standards. The EPA continues to rely on certain
guidance in the General Preamble to implement the 8-hour ozone
standards under title I.
\48\ General Preamble at 13560; see also Memorandum dated
December 14, 2000, from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air Directors,
``Additional Submission on RACM from States with Severe One-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements that are
not already either federally promulgated, part of the SIP, or otherwise
creditable in SIPs must be submitted in enforceable form as part of a
state's attainment plan for the area. CAA section 172(c)(6) requires
nonattainment plans to 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 attainment of such standards in
such area by the applicable attainment date.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of the RACM analysis is to determine whether or not
control measures exist that are economically and technically reasonable
and that provide emissions reductions that would advance the attainment
date for nonattainment areas. The EPA defines RACM as any potential
control measure for application to point, area, on-road, and non-road
emission source categories that: (1) is technologically feasible; (2)
is economically feasible; (3) does not cause ``substantial widespread
and long-term adverse impacts;'' (4) is not ``absurd, unenforceable, or
impracticable;'' and (5) can advance the attainment date by at least
one year.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ General Preamble at 13560.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 26823]]
issued a Control Techniques Guidelines document. CAA section 182(f)
requires that RACT under section 182(b)(2) also apply to major
stationary sources of NOX. In Extreme areas, a major source
is a stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least
10 tpy of VOC or NOX.\51\ Under the 1997 Ozone
Implementation rule, states were required to submit SIP revisions
meeting the RACT requirements of CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) no
later than 27 months after designation for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards (September 15, 2006, for areas designated in April 2004) and
to implement the required RACT measures no later than 30 months after
that submittal deadline.\52\ The EPA has approved the Severe area RACT
SIP for the SCAQMD for the 1997 ozone standards, which included rules
applicable to the Coachella Valley.\53\ With the reclassification from
Severe to Extreme nonattainment, the major source threshold shifts from
25 tpy to 10 tpy, changing the NOX and VOC sources subject
to the RACT requirements. While this action does not address the
Coachella Valley's RACT demonstration, we will consider the rules in
relevant RACT demonstrations as potentially addressing RACM
demonstration requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ CAA section 182(d).
\52\ See 40 CFR 51.912(a). Following the reclassification of the
Coachella Valley to Extreme nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards, the EPA established a deadline of February 14, 2021, for
the State to submit SIP revisions addressing the CAA section
182(b)(2) and 182(f) RACT requirements. 85 FR 2311, 2312 (January
15, 2020).
\53\ 73 FR 76947 (December 18, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Control Strategy and RACM Demonstration in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
a. The District's Component of the RACM Demonstration
The RACM demonstration begins on page 6-12 of the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan. The Plan's RACM demonstration builds on the SCAQMD's prior
RACM demonstrations for the Coachella Valley and South Coast Air Basin
for the 2008 ozone standards in the 2016 AQMP, which the EPA approved
in 2020.\54\ The Plan supplements this demonstration by evaluating as
potential RACM new rules put in place after the 2016 AQMP and rules for
area sources. The SCAQMD compared its rules with rules from other air
districts within California (i.e., the Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District, the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District,
the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District, and the Mojave
Desert Air Quality Management District) and from air quality agencies
in Delaware and Texas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan incorrectly identifies the
EPA's approval of the RACM demonstration as 82 FR 26854 (June 12,
2017), but the actual approval was published at 85 FR 57714
(September 16, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The evaluation of other districts' and states' rules for stationary
and area sources did not identify any rules as potential RACM. In all
but a few cases, SCAQMD rules were as stringent or more stringent than
other rules. Where other rules were more stringent, the SCAQMD still
determined that its rules provided RACM-level controls. For example,
the VOC control efficiency of SCAQMD Rule 461, ``Organic Liquid
Loading,'' is less stringent than another rule (i.e., 90 percent vs. 95
percent), but actual operational control efficiency at SCAQMD
facilities exceeded the higher (95 percent) limit. In another example,
SCAQMD Rule 1162, ``Polyester Resin Operations,'' which regulates more
than 15 different categories of wood product coatings, has a lower
limit than another district for one category, high-solid stains (240
grams per liter vs. 350 grams per liter), but ``for almost all
categories, Rule 1136 is as stringent as the other agency's rule and
provides RACM level of control for this source category.'' \55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Table 6-10 at p. 6-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan also highlights rules and programs revised since the
completion of the 2016 AQMP that are anticipated to achieve additional
reductions when fully implemented as planned. Table 4-1 of the Plan
shows these measures have collectively further reduced emissions by 6.3
tons per day (tpd) of NOX and 2.3 tpd of VOC.\56\ These
reductions would occur primarily in the South Coast Air Basin; however,
as the Plan explains, the ozone air quality problems of the Coachella
Valley are primarily caused by transported emissions from within the
South Coast Air Basin. The TSD for this proposed rulemaking supplements
the District's analysis with a discussion of rules adopted by the
SCAQMD since the completion of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Table 4-1 does not total the emission reductions for all
measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 AQMP included several commitments for additional emissions
reductions, such as for the applications of zero or near-zero
NOX emissions appliances in the residential and commercial
sectors (CMB-02), additional enhancement in reducing energy use in
existing residential buildings (ECC-03), and co-benefits from existing
residential and commercial building energy efficiency mandates (ECC-
02). Collectively, these measures are expected to achieve 2.6 tpd of
NOX reductions by 2023 in the South Coast Air Basin.\57\
Consistent with the emissions reductions from new and recently revised
rules, the benefits achieved are primarily expected in the South Coast
Air Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6-20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Local Jurisdiction Component of the RACM Demonstration
With respect to on-road mobile sources, we note that SCAG is the
designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for a large portion
of southern California, including Coachella Valley, and SCAG's
membership includes local jurisdictions within the Coachella Valley.
For the 2016 AQMP, SCAG evaluated a list of possible transportation
control measures (TCMs) as one element of the larger RACM evaluation
for the plan. TCMs are, in general, measures designed to reduce
emissions from on-road motor vehicles through reductions in VMT or
traffic congestion.
In our final actions on the Severe area RACM requirements for the
Coachella Valley for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone standards,\58\ we
concluded that the evaluation processes undertaken by SCAG were
consistent with the EPA's RACM guidance and found that there were no
additional RACM, including no additional TCMs that would advance
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the South Coast Air
Basin.\59\ More recently, we came to the same conclusion with respect
to RACM and TCMs for the South Coast in our action on the ozone portion
of the SCAQMD's ``Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan.'' \60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 82 FR 26854 and 85 FR 57714.
\59\ See also 81 FR 75764 (November 1, 2016) (proposed rule for
1997 8-hour ozone standards).
\60\ See 79 FR 29712, 29720 (May 23, 2014) (proposed rule); 79
FR 52526 (September 3, 2014) (final rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although TCMs are implemented in the upwind South Coast Air Basin
area to meet CAA requirements, neither the SCAQMD nor CARB rely on
implementation of any TCMs in the Coachella Valley to demonstrate
implementation of RACM in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The SCAQMD
and CARB justify the absence of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by
reference to the significant influence of pollutant transport from the
South Coast Air Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella Valley.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26824]]
c. The Statewide Component of the RACM Demonstration
CARB has primary responsibility for reducing emissions in
California from new and existing on-road and off-road engines and
vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer products. CARB has been a
leader in the development of stringent control measures for on-road and
off-road mobile sources, fuels, and consumer products. Because of this
role, the Plan identifies CARB's 2016 State Strategy as a key component
of the control strategy necessary to attain the State's ozone goals,
which includes attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The Plan states that
California has received waivers and authorizations for over 100
regulations and lists several recent examples, such as rules governing
light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles; off-road vehicles and
engines; and other sources including motorcycles, recreational boats,
off-road recreational vehicles, cargo handling equipment, and
commercial harbor craft.\62\ The Plan highlights reductions achieved
through ``more stringent engine emissions standards, in-use
requirements, incentive funding, and other policies and initiatives''
since the EPA's 2019 approval of the South Coast Air Basin RACM
demonstration for the 2008 ozone standards.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6-26.
\63\ Id. at 6-28 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CARB portion of the RACM evaluation also covers consumer
products. CARB regulates VOC emissions from more than 130 consumer
products, with the most recent rule revisions in 2018. The federal
regulations for consumer products were last amended in 1998.\64\ Since
submittal of the Plan, CARB has submitted additional consumer product
regulations for approval into the SIP, but EPA has yet to act on this
submittal.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ Id. at 6-29.
\65\ Letter dated April 25, 2023, from Steve S. Cliff, CARB, to
Martha Guzman, EPA Region IX, transmitting 2021 amendments to CARB's
consumer product regulations (submitted electronically April 25,
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation of the Control Strategy and RACM
We find that the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan includes a thorough
update of the District's RACM demonstration for the 2008 ozone
standards from the 2016 AQMP that we previously approved in 2020.\66\
This updated demonstration focuses on new rules put in place by five
California air districts and two states since completion of the 2016
AQMP, and we propose to find that it demonstrates that the District's
stationary source controls represent RACM for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ 85 FR 57714.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to mobile sources, we find that CARB's current program
addresses the full range of mobile sources in the South Coast Air Basin
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 adopted those measures that are reasonably available. As noted in
the TSD supporting this rulemaking, following submittal of the 2016
State Strategy, CARB has continued to submit mobile source control
measures, such as the Heavy-Duty Inspection and Maintenance Regulation,
which expands the inspection of heavy-duty trucks beyond particulate
matter emissions to include the equipment controlling NOX
emissions.
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 Air Basin are inclusive of all TCM RACM to be
reasonably justified and supported. For the 2016 AQMP, given the
minimal and diminishing emissions benefits generally associated with
TCMs, no combination of TCMs implemented in the Coachella Valley could
have contributed to advancing the attainment date in the Coachella
Valley, and no TCMs are reasonably available for implementation in the
Coachella Valley for the purposes of meeting the RACM requirement.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ While not required for CAA purposes, the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS
includes a list of projects for the Coachella Valley, some of which
represent the types of projects often identified as TCMs, such as
traffic signalization projects and bike lane projects. 2016-2040
RTP/SCS, Appendix, ``Project List.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, we find that CARB's consumer products program
generally exceeds the controls in place throughout other areas of the
country. The additional commitments included in the 2016 State Strategy
further strengthen this program by achieving additional VOC reductions.
Some of the committed measures have already been submitted to the EPA,
including lower VOC emission limits for seven consumer product
categories.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ Letter dated April 25, 2023, from Steve S. Cliff, CARB to
Martha Guzman, EPA Region IX, transmitting 2021 amendments to CARB's
consumer product regulations (submitted electronically April 25,
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Plan does not quantify the amount of reductions necessary
to advance attainment by one year, in view of the current timing of
this proposed approval, the Coachella Valley no longer has a practical
opportunity to advance attainment prior to 2023. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to find that the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan provides for
implementation of all RACM necessary to demonstrate expeditious
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the Coachella Valley,
consistent with the applicable requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1)
and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
C. Attainment Demonstration
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) 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.
In accordance with 40 CFR 51.903(a), areas classified Extreme for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS must demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 20 years after the effective date of
designation to nonattainment. The Coachella Valley was designated
nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2004,\69\ and
accordingly, the area must demonstrate attainment of the standards by
June 15, 2024. An attainment demonstration must show attainment of the
standards by the calendar year prior to the attainment date, so in
practice, Extreme nonattainment areas must demonstrate attainment in
2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ 69 FR 23858.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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,'' EPA 454/R-18-009, November 2018
[[Page 26825]]
(``Modeling Guidance'').\70\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ The EPA modeling guidance is available on the EPA website
at: https://www.epa.gov/scram/state-implementation-plan-sip-attainment-demonstration-guidance; direct link: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/O3-PM-RH-Modeling_Guidance-2018.pdf. 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 concentrations due to future emissions reductions
provides a relative response factor (RRF). Each monitoring site's RRF
is applied to its monitored base period 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 1997 8-hour ozone plans.\71\ The Modeling
Guidance states that the most recent year of the National Emissions
Inventory may be appropriate 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.\72\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ Modeling Guidance, 35.
\72\ 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.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
Chapter 5 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan includes a description
of photochemical modeling performed by the SCAQMD for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards. The modeling relies on a 2018 model base year and
projects design values to demonstrate attainment of the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in 2023.
Chapter 5, ``Future Air Quality,'' of the Plan, includes a
description of current air quality in the Coachella Valley, a summary
of the ozone modeling approach, a model performance evaluation, results
of the NAAQS attainment test, an unmonitored area analysis, an
assessment of ozone sensitivity to NOX and VOC reductions,
and a WOE analysis. The Plan uses the same approach that is outlined in
more detail in the 2016 AQMP, with some updates to the modeling
platform, input databases, and emissions inventories. Like the 2016
AQMP, the Plan uses the EPA recommended Community Multiscale Air
Quality Modeling System (CMAQ, version 5.0.2) modeling platform. An
overview of the modeling approach and modeling protocol can be found in
the 2016 AQMP, Appendix V, ``Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations,''
Chapter 1, ``Modeling Overview,'' and Chapter 2 ``Modeling Protocol.''
While the 2016 AQMP used 2012 as the model base year, the Plan uses
2018 as the model base year on which to develop meteorological
conditions and emissions inventories. Meteorological fields were
developed for 2018 using the Weather Research and Forecasting Model
(WRF, version 4.0.3) from the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Input information and model evaluation for WRF version 4.03 can be
found in the SCAQMD, ``Final 2022 Air Quality Management Plan,''
adopted December 2, 2022 (``2022 AQMP''), Appendix V, Chapter 3,
``Meteorological Modeling and Sensitivity Analyses.''
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 is adequate for
modeling Coachella Valley ozone. The WRF modeling uses routinely
available meteorological and air quality data collected during 2018.
Those data cover May through September, a period that spans the period
of highest ozone concentrations in the Coachella Valley. The District
evaluated the WRF model performance and concluded that the WRF
simulation for 2018 provided representative meteorological fields that
well characterized the observed conditions. The District's conclusions
were supported by statistical metrics and hourly time series plots of
water vapor mixing ratio, wind speed, direction, and temperature for
the southern California domain as well an evaluation of the predicted
planetary boundary layer height and the coast-to-inland temperature
gradient.
Ozone model performance statistics are described in the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan at Chapter 5.\74\ This chapter includes a table of
statistics recommended in the Modeling Guidance and hourly ozone time
series plots for 2018. The hourly time series and statistics show
generally good model performance, though many individual daily ozone
peaks are underpredicted.\75\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Chapter 5, 5-4--5-5.
\75\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, Figure 5-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After model performance for the 2018 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 2018 and the 2023 attainment year. The base year or
``reference year'' modeling inventory was the same as the inventory for
the modeling base case. The 2023 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,
2018, was simulated and analyzed to determine 8-hour average maximum
ozone concentrations for the 2018 and 2023 emissions inventories. To
develop the RRFs for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, only the top 10
days were used, consistent with the Modeling Guidance.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ Modeling Guidance, section 4.2.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Modeling Guidance addresses attainment demonstrations with
ozone NAAQS based on 8-hour averages and for the 1997 ozone NAAQS the
[[Page 26826]]
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan carries out the attainment test procedure
consistent with the Modeling Guidance. The RRFs are calculated as the
ratio of future to base year concentrations; these were then applied to
weighted base year design values for each monitor to arrive at future
year design values.\77\ Ozone is measured continuously at two locations
in the Coachella Valley at the Palm Springs and Indio air monitoring
stations. The modeled 2023 ozone design value at the Palm Springs site
(the higher of the two sites) is 0.0832 ppm; this value demonstrates
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ The Modeling Guidance recommends that RRFs be applied to
the average of three 3-year design values centered on the base year.
For a 2018 base year, recommended design values would be 2016-2018,
2017-2019, and 2018-2020. This amounts to a 5-year weighted average
of individual year 4th high concentrations, centered on the base
year of 2018, and so is referred to as a weighted design value. The
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan was adopted in December 2020, before
2020 monitoring data was available, so the Plan instead uses design
values for 2015-2017, 2016-2018, and 2017-2019.
\78\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan modeling includes an ``Unmonitored Area Analysis'' (UAA)
to assess whether locations without a monitor can reach attainment; the
standard attainment test procedure covers only locations with a
monitor. A UAA is recommended in the Modeling Guidance, but not
required in the 1997 Ozone Implementation Rule--Phase 2.\79\ Consistent
with EPA Guidance, the District calculated five-year weighted design
values for all monitoring stations that meet EPA's data quality
requirements within the modeling domain and spatially interpolated
concentrations for the area between the design values. RRFs were then
applied to the interpolated measurement field to calculate future year
design values. The District asserts that when all valid ozone design
values were interpolated, they were too sparsely populated near the
boundary of Coachella Valley to reasonably guide design value contours.
To compensate, the District excluded the Morongo monitor and added
several pseudo-monitors throughout the domain to guide the
interpolation.\80\ With these modifications the predicted future design
values are all below the level of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
throughout the domain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ 70 FR 71612.
\80\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the formal attainment demonstration, the Plan also
contains a WOE demonstration that includes ambient ozone data and
trends and a sensitivity analysis using CMAQ 5.3.1, a later version of
the model to complement the regional photochemical modeling analyses.
b. Control Strategy
The control strategy for attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the
Coachella Valley relies primarily on timely attainment in 2023 of the
1997 ozone NAAQS in the South Coast Air Basin. As described in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan and in Section I.B of this document, the
primary cause of ozone in the Coachella Valley is the transport of
ozone and its precursors from the South Coast Air Basin.
Because ozone concentrations at the Palm Springs monitor--the only
monitoring site currently exceeding the 8-hour 1997 ozone NAAQS--are
more sensitive to changes in NOX than VOCs,\81\ the Plan's
control strategy relies on NOX reductions and limited VOC
reductions. Since the EPA's promulgation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
NOX emissions in the South Coast Air Basin have declined by
76 percent.\82\ Mobile sources, responsible for 80 percent of regional
NOX emissions, are the primary focus of future emissions
reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5-8 and Figure 5-5.
\82\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 4-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A thorough discussion of the SCAQMD's control strategy for the
Coachella Valley appears in the 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP provides the
District's control strategy through the 2026 attainment year for the
2008 ozone standards. The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan provides an
update to that discussion, specifically focusing on the measures
implemented after the 2016 AQMP that result in emissions reductions by
2023.
The South Coast Air Basin control strategy for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
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
SCAQMD and CARB to certain regulatory and nonregulatory initiatives and
aggregate emissions reductions. In the 2016 AQMP, already-adopted
measures are expected to achieve approximately 66 percent of the
NOX reductions needed from a 2012 base year for the South
Coast Air Basin to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS in 2023. To address the
remaining emissions reductions, which are shown in Table 2, the 2016
AQMP included District and CARB aggregate commitments to achieve
additional emissions reductions by 2023. These reductions are discussed
in the EPA's proposed approval of the 2016 AQMP for the South Coast Air
Basin.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ 84 FR 28132 (June 17, 2019), Sections III.D.2.B.i and ii.
Table 2--District and CARB Aggregate Emission Reduction Commitments for
2023
[tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD \a\.............................. 23 6
CARB \b\................................ 113 50-51
-------------------------------
Total............................... 136 56-57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2016 AQMP at Table 4-10.
\b\ Source: 2016 AQMP at Table 4-5.
The Plan updates this analysis to incorporate more recent SCAQMD
and CARB rules and programs that continue to achieve emissions
reductions in future baseline emissions for both the South Coast Air
Basin and Coachella Valley. For SCAQMD, the revised regulations are
Regulation XX, ``RECLAIM Program;'' Rule 1111, ``Reduction of
NOX Emissions form Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central
Furnaces,'' and the CLEANair Furnace Rebate Program; Rule 1146.2,
``Large Water Heater, Small Boilers and Process Heaters;'' and Rule
1147, ``NOX Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources.'' The
District's incentive programs include the Carl Moyer Memorial Air
Quality Standards Attainment Program to retrofit and replace heavy-duty
diesel engines;
[[Page 26827]]
Clean School Buses Incentives; and the Surplus Off-Road Opt-In for
NOX Program for low emission heavy duty engines for off-road
diesel fleets.\84\ For CARB, the regulations that continue to result in
improved future emissions estimates include the Advanced Clean Cars
program, the Truck and Bus Regulation, and the In-Use Large Spark
Ignition Fleet Regulation.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, pp. 4-2 to 4-4.
\85\ The complete list of incentive programs is provided on
pages 4-3 to 4-4 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan also highlights rules and programs that continue to
achieve reductions that have not been factored into the future
emissions estimates for SCAQMD and CARB. SCAQMD efforts include Rule
1117, ``Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen form Glass Melting Furnaces;''
Rule 1134, ``Emissions of Oxides from Stationary Gas Turbines''; Rule
1135, ``Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Electricity Generating
Facilities;'' and facility-based mobile source measures covering marine
ports railyards, warehouse/distribution centers, commercial
developments and new developments and redevelopment projects.\86\ Table
4-1 shows estimated reductions for these rules and facility-based
mobile source measures. Some of the measures continue to increase
reductions in future years, including adopted CARB regulations not
reflected in the future emissions estimate such as the Innovative Clean
Transit Regulation; the Zero-Emission Airport Shuttle Regulation; the
Advanced Clean Truck regulation and the Omnibus Low-NOX
Regulation. All measures that achieve further emissions reduction and
not reflected in the future 2023 emissions estimate serve to increase
the likelihood that the Coachella Valley attains the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ Id. at 4-4 to 4-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Attainment Demonstration
Chapter 5 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan describes the
Coachella Valley's progress toward attaining the 1997 ozone standards.
The Plan summarizes the District's modeling for the area and concludes
that the measures included in the control strategy (including CARB
commitments) will result in the area attaining the standards no later
than 2023. The WOE discussion provides additional discussion of air
quality trends and projections in the Coachella Valley and determines
that the area is on track to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS by 2023.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
a. Photochemical Modeling
As discussed in Section III.A of this document, we are proposing to
approve the base year emissions inventory for the attainment
demonstration and to find that the future year emissions projections in
the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan reflect appropriate calculation methods
and that the latest planning assumptions are properly supported by SIP-
approved stationary source and mobile source measures. The Plan employs
the modeling protocol from the 2016 AQMP, and Appendix V of that
document in particular, with updates to the modeling platform, input
databases, and emissions inventory.\87\ The discussion below addresses
modeling information included in both the Plan and the 2016 AQMP.
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 the
Coachella Valley and the South Coast Air Basin. Similar and additional
discussion for the South Coast Air Basin can be found in our June 17,
2019 proposed action on the 2016 AQMP.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 5-2 and 5-8.
\88\ 84 FR 28132.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, the EPA
finds that the photochemical modeling is adequate for purposes of
supporting the attainment demonstration.\89\ First, we note the
discussion of modeling procedures, tests, and performance analyses
called for in the Modeling Protocol (i.e., 2016 AQMP, Appendix V,
Chapter 2) and the good model performance (Coachella Valley Ozone Plan,
Chapter 5). Second, we find the WRF meteorological model results and
performance statistics, including hourly time series graphs of water
vapor mixing ratio, wind speed, direction, and temperature for both the
South Coast and the Coachella Valley, to be satisfactory and consistent
with our Modeling Guidance.\90\ Performance was evaluated for the
winter season (January, November, and December 2018) and summer season
(June, July, and August 2018).\91\ Diurnal variation of temperature,
humidity, and surface wind are well represented by WRF. Temperature and
wind speed are more accurate in the summer season than in the winter
months. The observed temperature gradient from the coast to inland was
well characterized by WRF. Both the observational data and WRF
simulation showed distinct diurnal variations in wind speed in the
summer, with a strong sea breeze in the afternoon responsible for
transport inland. In general, the WRF simulations reproduce the
dominant wind direction as the measurement at each station. The diurnal
cycle in PBL height was well captured by the simulations. Overall, the
daily WRF simulation for 2018 provided representative meteorological
fields that characterized the observed conditions well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ The EPA's review of the modeling and attainment
demonstration is discussed in greater detail in section V of the TSD
for this action (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration'').
\90\ Modeling Guidance, 30.
\91\ 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 the Plan and are based on the statistical evaluation recommended
in the Modeling Guidance. Model performance was provided for 8-hour
daily maximum ozone in the nonattainment area. As noted in Section
IV.C.2.a of this document, the statistics and hourly time series show
generally good performance, and while many individual daily ozone peaks
are underpredicted, this does not mean that future concentrations based
on monitored data and modeled RRFs will be underestimated. In addition,
the WOE analysis presented provides additional information with respect
to the observational trends and further supports the model performance.
Notwithstanding the general sufficiency of the modeling, we find
that the Plan's UAA analysis does not provide justification for
excluding the Morongo monitor or for adding pseudo-monitors to alter
the interpolation. We therefore conclude the UAA is not sufficiently
supported, and we are not evaluating those results here. However, we
conclude that based on the density of the ozone monitoring stations
within the Coachella Valley and upwind, as well as the uncertainty in
the interpolation due to complex topography, the attainment
demonstration is adequately supported without a UAA. We recommend that
CARB and SCAQMD evaluate the continuing adequacy of the existing
monitors as part of their ambient air monitoring network 5-year network
assessment.
The modeling shows that existing control measures from CARB and the
District, together with the commitments in the 2016 AQMP and further
updated in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, are sufficient to attain
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards by 2023 at all monitoring sites in the
Coachella Valley.
[[Page 26828]]
We are proposing to find the air quality modeling adequate to support
the attainment demonstration for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, based on
reasonable meteorological and ozone modeling performance, and supported
by the WOE analysis.
For additional information, please see the TSD for this action.
b. Control Strategy
The control strategy in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan relies
primarily on previously adopted and future emissions reductions
detailed in the 2016 AQMP. As described in Section IV.C.2.b of this
document, 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 1997 ozone NAAQS in 2023. In our October 1, 2019 approval of
the 2016 South Coast Ozone SIP, the EPA approved the control strategy
to attain the 2008 ozone standards for the Coachella Valley by 2026,
including CARB's and the District's aggregate commitments, for the
South Coast to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ 84 FR 52005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons described in that action and based on the
District's demonstration specific to the Coachella Valley described in
this section, we propose to find the District's control strategy
acceptable for purposes of attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standards 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 1997 ozone NAAQS in the Coachella
Valley Ozone Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12). This
demonstration shows the area attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
by the outermost statutory attainment date of June 15, 2024.
D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations
1. Rate of Progress
For areas classified as Moderate or above, CAA section 182(b)(1)
requires a SIP revision providing for ROP, defined as a one time, 15
percent actual VOC emissions reduction during the six years following
the baseline year 1990, or an average of 3 percent per year. While the
ROP demonstration is a potentially applicable continuing applicable
requirement, the EPA has already approved the 15 percent VOC only ROP
demonstration for Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards,
so this requirement has been met.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ 82 FR 26854.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Reasonable Further Progress
a. Requirements
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) require plans for
nonattainment areas to provide for RFP. RFP is defined in CAA section
171(1) as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the
relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may reasonably
be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment
of the applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.'' CAA section
182(c)(2)(B) requires ozone nonattainment areas classified as Serious
or higher to submit no later than 3 years after designation for the
1997 8-hour ozone standards an RFP SIP providing for an average of 3
percent per year of VOC and/or NOX emissions reductions for
(1) the 6-year period immediately following the baseline year; and (2)
all remaining 3-year periods after the first 6-year period out to the
area's attainment date.\94\ The RFP requirement is a continuing
applicable requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-
backsliding rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40
CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ Following the reclassification of the Coachella Valley to
Extreme nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, the EPA
established a deadline of February 14, 2021, for the state to submit
SIP revisions addressing the CAA section sections 172(c)(2) and
182(b)(1) RFP requirements. 85 FR 2311, 2312.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for the substitution of
NOX emissions reductions in place of VOC reductions to meet
the RFP requirements. According to the EPA's NOX
Substitution Guidance,\95\ the substitution of NOX
reductions for VOC reductions must be done on a percentage basis,
rather than a straight ton-for-ton exchange. There are two steps for
substituting NOX for VOC. First, an equivalency
demonstration must show that the cumulative RFP emissions reductions
are consistent with the NOX and VOC emissions reductions
determined in the ozone attainment modeling demonstration. Second,
specified reductions in NOX and VOC emissions should be
accomplished after the initial 6-year ROP reductions are achieved and
before the attainment date, consistent with the continuous RFP emission
reduction requirement.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
``NOX Substitution Guidance,'' December 1993.
\96\ As noted in Section IV.D.1 of this document, Coachella
Valley has already met the 15 percent ROP demonstration requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 182(b)(1) requires that reductions exclude emissions
reductions from four prescribed federal programs (i.e., the federal
motor vehicle control program, the federal Reid vapor pressure (RVP)
requirements, any RACT corrections previously specified by the EPA, and
any I/M program corrections necessary to meet the Basic I/M level); and
(3) be calculated from an ``adjusted'' baseline relative to the year
for which the reduction is applicable.
The adjusted base year inventory must exclude the emissions
reductions from fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996 and from federal
RVP regulations promulgated by November 15, 1990, or required under
section 211(h) of the Act. The net effect of these adjustments is that
states are not able to take credit for emissions reductions that would
result from fleet turnover of current federal-standard cars and trucks,
or from already existing federal fuel regulations. However, the SIP can
take full credit for the benefits of any post-1990 vehicle emissions
standards, as well as any other new federal or state motor vehicle or
fuel programs that will be implemented in the nonattainment area,
including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new evaporative emissions
standards, reformulated gasoline, Enhanced I/M, California low
emissions vehicle program, transportation control measures, etc.
b. RFP Demonstration in the State Submittal
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan contains emissions estimates for
the baseline, milestone, and attainment years.\97\ Tables 3 and 4 show
the RFP demonstration.\98\ The RFP
[[Page 26829]]
demonstration calculates future year VOC targets from the 2002
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. The
District concluded that RFP demonstration meets the applicable
requirements for each milestone year as well as the attainment year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, pp. 6-1 to 6-7.
\98\ The years between 2002 and 2020 were addressed in the
``Staff Report, Proposed Updates to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard,
State Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and Western Mojave
Desert'' (``2014 SIP Update'') which covered the Coachella Valley's
Severe area requirements for the 1997 ozone standards. 82 FR 26854.
Table 3--Calculation of RFP Demonstration for Coachella Valley--VOC \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emission calculations 2002 \b\ 2020 \b\ 2023 \b\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Baseline VOC (tpd)........................................... 22.85 14.30 14.44
2. Required Percent Reductions from Base Year (%)............... n/a 51% 60%
3. Target VOC Level (tpd)....................................... n/a 11.2 9.1
4. Cumulative Milestone Year Shortfall (tpd).................... n/a 3.1 5.3
5. Cumulative Shortfall in VOC (%).............................. n/a 13.6% 37.1%
6. Incremental Milestone Year Shortfall (%)..................... n/a 13.6% 23.5%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: Table 6-1 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
\b\ Units are tons per day (summer planning) unless otherwise noted.
Table 4--Calculation of RFP Demonstration for Coachella Valley--NOX \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX emission calculations 2002 \b\ 2020 \b\ 2023 \b\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Baseline NOX Emissions (tpd)................................. 54.24 15.77 12.33
2. Reductions in NOX Emissions since Base Year (tpd)............ n/a 38.47 41.91
3. Percent Reductions in NOX Emissions since Base Year.......... n/a 70.9% 77.3%
4. Previous NOX Substitution (%)................................ n/a n/a 13.6%
5. Percent Available for NOX Substitution (%)................... n/a 70.9% 63.7%
6. Incremental Milestone Year VOC Shortfall (%)................. n/a 13.6% 23.5%
7. Percent Surplus Reduction (%)................................ n/a 57.3% 40.2%
8. RFP Compliance............................................... n/a Yes Yes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: Table 6-2 of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. Table 4 of this document has been adapted from Table 6-
2 to remove adjustments related to use of excess NOX emissions reductions to address the contingency measures
requirements of CAA sections 179(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). Under the EPA's most recent guidance (described in
Section IV.G.1 of this document), excess NOX reductions may not be used for this purpose.
\b\ Units are tons per day (summer planning) unless otherwise noted.
CAA section 182(b)(1)(D) prohibits states from taking credit for
certain categories of measures in an RFP demonstration. The three
categories of non-creditable measures identified in CAA sections
182(b)(1)(D)(iii)-(iv) achieved their reductions many years ago and
reductions from these measures would have no effect for the RFP
milestones modeled in the Plan.\99\ All categories of non-creditable
emissions are considered de minimis for the 2008 or 2015 ozone NAAQS
(and therefore do not need to be calculated as part of in an RFP
demonstration for these standards).\100\ While emissions from the
category identified in CAA section 182(b)(1)(D)(i) (``any measure
relating to motor vehicle exhaust or evaporative emissions promulgated
by the Administrator by January 1, 1990'') affect the demonstration for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, the change in this effect becomes
smaller with each successive milestone year. CARB has provided
estimates for non-creditable emissions, which are less than 10 percent
of the base year inventory. For more information about the correction
to the non-creditable reductions in the 2014 SIP Update, including a
revised RFP demonstration, see the TSD supporting this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ 80 FR 12264, 12274.
\100\ 40 CFR 51.1110(a)(7) and 51.1310(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP Demonstrations
As noted in Section IV.D.1 of this document, the EPA has already
approved a 15-percent ROP plan for the Coachella Valley in our prior
action on SCAQMD's submittal for the 1997 ozone NAAQS; \101\ therefore,
we find that the District and CARB have met the ROP requirement for
this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ 82 FR 26854.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the emissions inventory documentation in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, 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, and that the District and CARB have used an
appropriate calculation method to demonstrate RFP. For these reasons,
we have determined that the Plan demonstrates RFP in the 2023
attainment year, consistent with applicable CAA requirements and EPA
guidance. We therefore propose to approve the Extreme RFP demonstration
for the Coachella Valley for the 1997 ozone NAAQS under CAA sections
172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(4).
E. Vehicle Miles Travelled Offset Demonstration
1. Requirements for a VMT Offset Demonstration
CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a state to submit a revision for
each area classified as Severe or above to identify and adopt specific
enforceable transportation control strategies (TCSs) and TCMs to offset
growth in emissions from growth in VMT or numbers of vehicle trips in
such area. CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also requires the SIP to attain
reductions in motor vehicle emissions consistent with RFP
demonstrations; and to implement measures as necessary to demonstrate
attainment. We refer to CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) as the ``VMT offset
requirement.'' The VMT offset requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules
[[Page 26830]]
that apply once a standard has been revoked.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ 40 CFR 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in
Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA,\103\ we 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'').\104\ The August 2012 Guidance
discusses the meaning of the terms TCSs and TCMs, and recommends that
both TCSs and TCMs be included in the emissions 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 strategy.'' \105\ TCM
is defined at 40 CFR 51.100(r) to mean ``any measure that is directed
toward reducing emissions of air pollutants from transportation
sources,'' including, but not limited to, measures listed in CAA
section 108(f), and generally refers to programs intended to reduce the
VMT, the 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, trip reduction ordinances,
and similar measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ 632 F.3d. 584, 596-597 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted as
amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 668, further amended February
13, 2012 (ruling additional TCMs 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).
\104\ EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
``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,'' EPA-
420-B-12-053, August 2012.
\105\ See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The August 2012 Guidance also explains how states may demonstrate
that the VMT offset requirement is satisfied in conformance with the
Court's ruling. In the approach recommended by the August 2012
Guidance, states develop one emission inventory estimate for the base
year, and three different emissions inventory scenarios for the
attainment year. Two of these scenarios 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. The August 2012 Guidance
contains specific details on how states might conduct the calculations.
The base year on-road VOC emissions inventory should be based on
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 the 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, representing a no action scenario. Emissions in the attainment
year in this scenario may be lower than those in the base year due to
fleet turnover to lower-emitting vehicles. Emissions may also be higher
if VMT and/or vehicle trips are projected to sufficiently increase in
the attainment year.
The second of the attainment year emissions calculations would also
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited have been
put in place since the base year and would also assume no growth in VMT
and trips between the base year and attainment year. Like the no-action
attainment year estimate described previously, emissions in the
attainment year may be lower than those in the base year due to fleet
turnover, but the emissions would not be influenced by any growth in
VMT or trips. This emissions estimate, the VMT offset ceiling scenario,
would reflect the maximum attainment emissions that should be allowed
to occur under the statute as interpreted by the Ninth Circuit 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.
These two hypothetical status quo estimates are necessary steps in
identifying target emission levels. Comparison of the first two
attainment year calculations would identify whether there was a
hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT that needs to be
offset, and as a result whether further TCMs or TCSs beyond those that
have been adopted and implemented are needed.
The third calculation incorporates 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 that were put in
place after the baseline year. 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 hypothetical growth in emissions
identified by comparison of the first two attainment year calculations.
If the projected actual attainment year emissions are greater than
the VMT offset ceiling 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 meet the VMT emissions offset requirement of section
182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by the Ninth Circuit, the additional TCSs
or TCMs would need to offset the growth in emissions and bring the
actual emissions down to at least the same level as the attainment year
VMT offset ceiling estimate in the second attainment year calculation.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Offset Demonstration
The VMT Offset Demonstration uses EMFAC2017 to estimates on-road
emissions. EMFAC2017 was the latest EPA-approved motor vehicle
emissions model for California available at the time the VMT Offset
Demonstration was prepared.\106\ The EMFAC2017 results,
[[Page 26831]]
however, were adjusted based on a sensitivity analysis using older
previously approved EMFAC models, EMFAC2011 and EMFAC2014. As the VMT
Offset Demonstration explains, several post-2002 emissions control
measures are factored into EMFAC2017 and cannot be removed. To correct
this, the VMT Offset Demonstration included the results of a
sensitivity analysis to determine the emissions reductions associated
with CARB's Advanced Clean Cars I program \107\ and the Truck and Bus
Regulations \108\ with EMFAC2014, and the additional stringency of
CARB's I/M programs \109\ calculated using EMFAC2011.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ 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 at that time, in a
rulemaking published at 84 FR 41717 (August 15, 2019).
\107\ The EPA approved the Advanced Clean Car program in the
California SIP on June 16, 2016 (81 FR 39424).
\108\ The EPA approved the Truck and Bus Rule into the
California SIP on April 4, 2012 (77 FR 20308).
\109\ The EPA approved California's I/M program into the
California SIP on July 1, 2010 (75 FR 38023).
\110\ Two other control programs started after 2002, the Heavy-
Duty Greenhouse Gas Regulation and Low Carbon Fuel Standard, have no
impact on VOC emissions. VMT Offset Demonstration, p. 9, n. 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the EMFAC models calculate 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 models combine trip-based VMT data and speed
distribution from the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, along with vehicle data from
the California Department of Motor Vehicles and the 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. As such,
emissions from these processes are directly related to VMT and vehicle
trips, and the State included emissions from them in the calculations
that provide the basis for the revised Coachella Valley VMT Offset
Demonstration.\111\ Resting and diurnal losses occur independently of
vehicle activity were and not considered in the demonstration.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ VMT Offset Demonstration, p. 2.
\112\ This fact is noted in several locations of the VMT Offset
Demonstration, e.g., p. 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VMT Offset Demonstration also includes the previously described
three attainment year scenarios (i.e., no new measures; no VMT Growth
or VMT offset ceiling; and projected actual) for 2023. Table 5
summarizes the emissions estimates for the base year and the three
scenarios.
Table 5--VMT Offset Inventory Scenarios and Results for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VMT Controls VOC Emissions
Scenario ---------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1000 miles/day Year tpd
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Year....................................... 2002 11,091 2002 8.5
No New Measures................................. 2023 14,508 2002 2.8
No New Measures and No VMT Growth (VMT Offset 2002 11,091 2002 2.0
Ceiling).......................................
Projected Actual................................ 2023 14,508 2018 1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: Coachella Valley VMT Offset Demonstration, Table 1.
For the base year scenario, CARB ran the EMFAC2017 model for the
2002 RFP base year using VMT and starts data corresponding to those
years. For the no new measures scenario, CARB estimated 2023 on-road
vehicle emissions using EMFAC2017, considering the estimated increase
in VMT,\113\ but adding 0.33 tpd to account for the additional
reductions associated with the Advanced Clean Cars I program, Truck and
Bus Regulation, and I/M programs that are not creditable reductions in
these calculations. Likewise, CARB added 0.25 tpd to the VMT offset
ceiling to account for the same factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ This estimate included an additional 0.33 tpd based on the
sensitivity analysis conducted with the EMFAC2011 and EMFAC2014
models to account for the EMFAC reductions for CARB's Advanced Clean
Cars I program, Truck and Bus Regulation, and I/M programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the VMT offset ceiling scenario, the State ran the EMFAC2011
model for the attainment year but with VMT and starts data
corresponding to base year values. Like the no action scenario, the
EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to reflect VOC emissions levels in the
attainment year without the benefits of the on-road motor vehicle
control programs implemented after the base year. Thus, the VMT offset
ceiling scenario reflects hypothetical VOC emissions if the State had
not put in place any TCSs or TCMs after the base year and if there had
been no growth in VMT or vehicle trips between the base year and the
attainment year. As shown in Table 5, CARB estimates VMT offset ceiling
VOC emissions to be 2.0 tpd in 2023.
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 estimate
for the VMT offset ceiling scenario. Based on the values in Table 5,
the hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips in
the Coachella Valley would have been 0.8 tpd (i.e., 2.8 tpd minus 2.0
tpd). This hypothetical difference establishes the level of emissions
caused by growth in VMT that need to be offset by the combination of
post-baseline year TCMs and TCSs and any necessary additional TCMs and
TCSs.
For the projected actual scenario calculation, the State included
the emissions benefits from TCSs and TCMs put in place since the base
year.\114\ In addition to the measures already discussed, a full list
of CARB mobile source regulations from 1990 through the Plan's
development appears in Attachment A-1 of the VMT Offset Demonstration.
While some of these measures were adopted prior to 2002, all or part of
their implementation occurred after 2002. CARB determined the area
complied with the VMT Offset Demonstration because actual emissions did
not exceed the VMT offset ceiling scenario calculation, in accordance
with EPA guidance.\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\114\ As described in Section IV.B.2.c of this document, the
TCMs are focused in the South Coast Air Basin, which heavily
influences air quality in the Coachella Valley due to the downwind
transport.
\115\ EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
``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,'' EPA-
420-B-12-053, August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Evaluation of the VMT Offset Demonstration
CARB's VMT Offset Demonstration uses a 2002 RFP base year. This is
the same year used for the Coachella Valley
[[Page 26832]]
Severe area VMT offset demonstration for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,\116\ it
corresponds to the Plan's baseline year for the RFP emissions
inventory, and we find it appropriate for this demonstration.\117\
Further, we find CARB's methodology incorporating sensitivity analysis
to adjust for the periodic change in emissions control measures and the
omission of resting and diurnal emissions appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ 81 FR 75764, 75779.
\117\ The 2002 RFP base year is also consistent with the
approach described in the 1997 Ozone Implementation Rule--Phase 2.
See 70 FR 71612, 71632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 5, the VMT Offset Demonstration projects actual
2023 attainment-year VOC emissions of 1.9 tpd in the Coachella Valley,
which is less than the VMT offset ceiling scenario value of 2.0 tpd.
Therefore, the VMT Offset Demonstration shows that existing measures
are sufficient to offset the increase due solely to VMT and additional
trips, consistent with the methodology in the EPA's August 2012
Guidance, and that no new TCMs or TCSs are required for the area. We
are proposing to approve the VMT Offset Demonstration.
F. Clean Fuels or Advanced Control Technology for Boilers
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Section 182(e)(3) of the CAA provides that SIPs for Extreme
nonattainment areas require each new, modified, and existing electric
utility and industrial and commercial boiler that emits more than 25
tpy of NOX to either burn as its primary fuel natural gas,
methanol, or ethanol (or a comparably low-polluting fuel), or use
advanced control technology, such as catalytic control technologies or
other comparably effective control methods.
Additional guidance on this requirement is provided in the General
Preamble.\118\ In the General Preamble, the EPA states that, for the
purposes of CAA section 182(a)(3), a boiler should generally be
considered as any combustion equipment used to produce steam and
generally does not include a process heater that transfers heat from
combustion gases to process streams.\119\ In addition, boilers with
rated heat inputs less than 15 million British thermal units (MMBtu)
per hour that are oil- or gas-fired may generally be considered de
minimis and exempt from these requirements because it is unlikely that
they will exceed the 25 tpy NOX emission limit.\120\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ 57 FR 13498, 13523.
\119\ 57 FR 13498, 13523.
\120\ Id at 13524.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The Coachella Valley Ozone Plan discusses compliance with the
requirements of CAA section 182(e)(3) by reference to SCAQMD Rules 1146
(``Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and
Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters'') and 1135
(``Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Electricity Generating
Facilities'').\121\ These rules require the best available retrofit
control technology (BARCT) for existing boilers. New or modified
sources with emissions increases are subject to California best
available control technology (BACT) requirements, which are comparable
to the federal lowest achievable emissions rate (LAER) requirements for
major sources as defined in CAA section 171(3). Accordingly, the Plan
concludes that no additional action is needed to satisfy the CAA
section 182(e)(3) requirement for the Coachella Valley's
reclassification to Extreme.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\121\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 6-31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
In our previous evaluation of the 2016 AQMP, which includes a
similar documentation of compliance with CAA 182(e)(3), we determined
that SCAQMD Rules 1303, 1146, and 2004 satisfy the clean fuel or
advanced control technology for boilers requirement in CAA section
182(e)(3) for the South Coast Air Basin.\122\ For similar reasons, we
find that the requirements for new, modified, and existing boilers in
approved SCAQMD Rules 1303, 1146, and 2004 satisfy the clean fuel or
advanced control technology for boilers requirement in CAA section
182(e)(3), and based on this finding, we propose to find the State has
demonstrated that these requirements are met for the Coachella Valley
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ 84 FR 28132, 28164.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Other CAA Requirements
1. Contingency Measures
Under the CAA, ozone nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2
as Serious or above must include in their SIPs contingency measures
consistent with sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). CAA section 172(c)(9)
requires states with nonattainment areas to provide for the
implementation of specific measures to be undertaken if the area fails
to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.
Such measures must be included in the SIP as contingency measures to
take effect in any such case without further action by the state or the
EPA. CAA section 182(c)(9) requires states to provide contingency
measures in the event that an ozone nonattainment area fails to meet
any applicable RFP milestone. 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.
In March 2023, the EPA announced a new draft guidance addressing
the contingency measures requirement of section 172(c)(9), entitled
``DRAFT: Guidance on the Preparation of State Implementation Plan
Provisions that Address the Nonattainment Area Contingency Measure
Requirements for Ozone and Particulate Matter,'' and provided an
opportunity for public comment.\123\ The principal differences between
this draft revised guidance and previous existing guidance on
contingency measures relate to the EPA's recommendations concerning the
specific amount of emissions reductions that implementation of
contingency measures should achieve, and the timing for when the
emissions reductions from the contingency measures should occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ 88 FR 17571 (March 23, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plan explains that the District intends to amend SCAQMD Rule
445, ``Wood Burning Devices,'' to include potential contingency
provisions for Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards.\124\ To date, the EPA has not received a submittal to
address the 1997 ozone contingency measures requirements of CAA
sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) for the Coachella Valley. The EPA is
not proposing action on the Coachella Valley contingency measures
requirement for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan p. 6-30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CAA Section 185 Fees
Under sections 182(d)(3), (e), and (f) and 185 of the Act, states
with ozone nonattainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme are
required to submit a revision to the SIP that would require major
stationary sources of VOC or NOX to pay a fee upon a failure
to attain by the applicable attainment date. Under CAA section 185,
this fee is calculated as $5,000 in 1990 dollars, adjusted for
inflation, for every ton emitted by the source during the calendar year
in excess of 80 percent of the source's
[[Page 26833]]
actual emissions in the applicable attainment year.\125\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ CAA section 185(a) and (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the EPA has approved SCAQMD Rule 317 into the SIP for the 1-
hour ozone standards, the SCAQMD has not submitted a rule to address
the requirement of CAA section 185 for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards.
We are aware, however, that the SCAQMD is working to create to a rule
to address this requirement, SCAQMD Rule 317.1, ``Clean Air Act
Nonattainment Fees for the 8-Hour Ozone Standards.'' The SCAQMD has
prepared a draft rule and held a workshop to discuss it on November 7,
2023.\126\ The EPA is not proposing action on the CAA Section 185 fee
requirement for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/rules/scaqmd-rule-book/proposed-rules/rule-317-and-317-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. New Source Review Rules
Section 182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires states to develop SIP
revisions containing permit programs for each ozone nonattainment area.
These SIP revisions must 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.\127\ In addition,
CAA section 182(e)(1) requires the permitting offset ratios for
volatile organic compound and NOX for major sources and
modifications in an Extreme nonattainment area to be at least 1.5 to 1,
or at least 1.2 to 1 if the plan requires all existing major sources in
the nonattainment area to use the best available control technology.
SCAQMD Rule 1302, ``Definitions,'' and Rule 2000, ``General'' (part of
the RECLAIM regulations), have been submitted to address these
requirements.\128\ The EPA has not yet acted on this submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ See also CAA section 182(e).
\128\ Letter dated February 12, 2021, from Richard W. Corey,
CARB, to Deborah Jordan, EPA Region IX (submitted electronically on
February 12, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Clean Fuels for Fleets
Section 182(c)(4)(A) of the CAA requires states to submit SIP
revisions to implement the clean-fuel vehicle program for fleets
described at CAA section 246 (``Clean Fuels Fleet Program'') in each
ozone nonattainment area classified as Serious and above. Section
182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows states to opt out of the federal Clean
Fuels 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
Clean Fuels 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.\129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ 64 FR 46849 (August 27, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent EPA guidance for the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards \130\
identifies several methods to demonstrate compliance with the Clean
Fuels Fleet Program requirement. Among them, a state may submit a
certification SIP revision if it has ``an approved [Clean Fuels Fleet
Program] or substitute measure(s) that it is continuing to implement,
and the state does not plan to make any changes to the program or
substitute measure(s).'' \131\ Consistent with this guidance, the EPA
approved the ``California Clean Fuels for Fleets Certification for the
70 ppb (2015) Ozone Standard,'' which included Coachella Valley, in a
final rule dated May 25, 2023.\132\ However, because the Plan does not
contain a certification for the 1997 ozone standards, the EPA is taking
no action regarding this requirement as part of this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, ``Guidance
for Fulfilling the Clean Fuel Fleets Requirement of the Clean Air
Act,'' EPA-420-B-22-027, June 2022.
\131\ Id. at 8.
\132\ 88 FR 33830.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Enhanced 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.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ 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 in
California, including the Southeast Desert, to meet the enhanced
monitoring requirements of CAA section 182(c)(1) and the PAMS
regulations.\134\ The EPA determined that the PAMS SIP revision met all
applicable requirements for enhanced monitoring and approved the PAMS
submittal into the California SIP.\135\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ In the designation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS nonattainment
areas, the Southeast Desert was split into the Los Angeles and San
Bernardino (Western Mojave Desert) and Coachella Valley
Nonattainment Areas.
\135\ 82 FR 45191 (September 28, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix B, ``Enhanced Ozone Monitoring Plan,'' of the District's
Five-Year Monitoring Network Assessment, dated June 1, 2020, describes
the District's plan to address the requirements of section
182(c)(1).\136\ The EPA has approved the District's review, including
the Enhanced Ozone Monitoring Plan in a letter dated October 28,
2020.\137\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\136\ Letter dated June 26, 2020, from Rene Bermudez, SCAQMD, to
Jennifer Williams, EPA Region IX, transmitting the District's Five-
Year Monitoring Network Assessment.
\137\ Letter dated October 28, 2020, from Gwen Yoshimura, EPA
Region IX, to Matt Miyasato, SCAQMD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\138\ 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.\139\ Therefore,
based on our review and approval of the 2020 Five-Year Network
Monitoring Assessment we find the District has adequately addressed the
enhanced monitoring requirements under CAA section 182(c)(1) for the
Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006).
\139\ 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs
Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Serious or above to implement an
enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program in those
areas. The requirements for those programs are provided in CAA section
182(c)(3) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S. The EPA approved the State of
California's SIP revision addressing this requirement in a final rule
dated July 1, 2010.\140\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ 75 FR 38023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
We expect that this proposed action, if approved, will generally be
neutral or contribute to a reduction in adverse environmental and
health impacts on all
[[Page 26834]]
populations in the Coachella Valley, including people of color and low-
income populations in the area. At a minimum, the approved action would
not worsen any existing air quality and is expected to ensure the area
is meeting requirements to attain air quality standards. Further, there
is no information in the record indicating that this action is expected
to have disproportionately high or adverse human health or
environmental effects on a particular group of people. In responding to
public concerns about environmental justice in eastern Coachella
Valley, the Plan notes that (1) Assembly Bill 617 funding has reduced
pollutant emissions in Eastern Coachella Valley by 63.1 tpy of
NOX, 7.5 tpy of VOC, and 5.3 tpy of diesel particulate
matter,\141\ and (2) the SCAQMD has provided $966,667 in energy
efficiency upgrades, reducing energy costs for homes within designated
environmental justice areas of Indio and Eastern Coachella Valley.\142\
The 2016 AQMP also identifies an Environmental Justice Advisory Group
established to ``advise and assist SCAQMD in protecting and improving
public health in SCAQMD's most impacted communities through the
reduction and prevention of air pollution.'' \143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, p. 9-8. SCAQMD's website
identifies Assembly Bill 617 Community Air Initiatives as
``community based efforts that focus on improving air quality and
public health in environmental justice communities.'' See https://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about/initiatives/environmental-justice/ab617-134.
\142\ Id.
\143\ 2016 AQMP p. 9-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. The EPA's Proposed Action and Public Comment
For the reasons discussed in this document, the EPA is proposing to
approve the California's SIP submittal for the Coachella Valley
addressing the Extreme nonattainment areas for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
The EPA is proposing to approve the following elements of SCAQMD's
``Final Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for 1997 8 Hour Ozone
Standard,'' dated December 2020, under CAA section 110(k)(3):
1. The RACM demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17);
2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(4); and
3. The attainment demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12).
The EPA is also proposing to approve CARB's ``2020 Coachella Valley
Vehicle Miles Traveled Emissions Offset Demonstration,'' release date
January 22, 2022. The demonstration provides for transportation control
strategies and measures sufficient to offset any growth in emissions
from growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips, and to provide for
RFP and attainment, as meeting the requirements of CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). Additionally,
we are proposing to find that the State has satisfied the clean fuel or
advanced control technology for boilers requirement in CAA section
182(e)(3) for the Coachella Valley for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. We
will accept comments from the public on this action for the next 30
days. We will consider these comments before taking final action.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and
14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
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.
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 action 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).
Furthermore, Executive Order 12898, ``Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), directs Federal agencies
to identify and address ``disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects'' of their actions on minority
populations and low-income populations to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law. The EPA defines environmental justice
(EJ) as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to
the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair
treatment to mean that ``no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, including
those resulting from the negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and
policies.''
The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. However,
as described in Section IV of this document, the District has taken
measures to address environmental justice concerns within the Coachella
Valley. The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ
in this action. Due to the nature of this proposed action, if
finalized, this action is expected to have
[[Page 26835]]
a neutral to positive impact on the air quality of Coachella Valley.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
Executive Order 12898, to achieve environmental justice for people of
color, low-income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 9, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-08121 Filed 4-15-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
