Air Plan Approval and Attainment Date Extension; 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; San Joaquin Valley, California, 91263-91269 [2024-25946]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State. To further address the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States described in E.O. 12957 of March 15, 1995 (‘‘Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources’’) and E.O. 13902, and in consultation with the Department of State, I hereby determine that section 1(a)(i) of E.O. 13902 shall apply to the petroleum and petrochemical sectors of the Iranian economy. Any person determined to operate in these sectors shall be subject to sanctions pursuant to section 1(a)(i). This determination shall take effect on October 11, 2024. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Treasury. Lisa M. Palluconi, Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. [FR Doc. 2024–26800 Filed 11–18–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250 and EPA–R09– OAR–2024–0301; FRL–12006–02–R9] Air Plan Approval and Attainment Date Extension; 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; San Joaquin Valley, California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) requirements for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) in the San Joaquin Valley ‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment area. The EPA is also finalizing a one-year extension of the applicable attainment date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, for the 1997 annual PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, nonattainment area based on our evaluation of air quality monitoring data and the extension request and supporting information submitted by the State of California. DATES: This rule is effective on December 19, 2024. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250 and EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301. All ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 documents in the dockets are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with 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: Ashley Graham, Geographic Strategies and Modeling Section (AIR–2–2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972– 3877; email: graham.ashleyr@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Summary of the Proposed Actions II. Public Comments and EPA Responses A. Comments From CCAC B. Comments From Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe III. Environmental Justice Considerations IV. Final Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Summary of the Proposed Actions On July 8, 2024, the EPA proposed two actions related to the CAA requirements for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley Serious nonattainment area. In the first action, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA proposed to approve through parallel processing the ‘‘Amendments to the 15 mg/m3 SIP Revision and Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard’’ (‘‘15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments’’) as a revision to the California SIP.1 The 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments seek to amend a SIPapproved measure, the ‘‘Accelerated Turnover of Agricultural Equipment Incentive Projects’’ (‘‘Valley Incentive Measure’’), to include a quantification of the emissions reductions for the year 2023 from existing agricultural equipment projects from the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program (‘‘Carl Moyer’’) and CARB’s Funding Agricultural Replacement Measures for Emission Reductions (FARMER) program and seek EPA approval of those emission reductions for SIP credit. The 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments also seek to revise the aggregate tonnage commitment in the attainment plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., the ‘‘Attainment Plan Revision for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard’’ (‘‘15 mg/m3 SIP Revision’’)) by replacing it with a commitment to achieve the same reductions from the Valley Incentive Measure. As part of the EPA’s proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments, we proposed to approve the State’s demonstration that the Valley Incentive Measure has achieved emissions reductions of 5.0 tons per day (tpd) of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 0.27 tpd of direct PM2.5 in the year 2023, and proposed to credit the reductions as a substitute measure to meet the aggregate tonnage commitment in the 15 mg/m3 SIP Revision.2 In the second action, based in part on our proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments, the EPA proposed to grant California’s request for a one-year extension of the applicable attainment date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, for the 1997 annual PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, nonattainment area.3 The proposed action to extend the applicable attainment date for this nonattainment area was based on the EPA’s evaluation of air quality monitoring data and extension request submitted by the State of California, and our determination that the State has satisfied the two statutory criteria for a one-year extension under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C): The State has complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan, and in accordance with guidance published by the Administrator, no more than the minimal number of exceedances of the relevant national ambient air quality standard has occurred in the area in the year preceding the Extension Year. For details regarding the EPA’s reasons for proposing to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments and to grant the one-year extension, please see the July 8, 2024 proposal notices.4 On August 22, 2024, California submitted the final version of the 15 mg/ m3 Plan Amendments to the EPA as a 2 Id. 3 89 1 89 PO 00000 FR 55896 (July 8, 2024). Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 91263 4 89 FR 55901 (July 8, 2024). FR 55896 and 89 FR 55901. E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 91264 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations revision to the California SIP.5 We have reviewed this submittal and find that it fulfills the SIP completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The SIP submission also includes evidence that adequate public notice was given and that an opportunity for a public hearing was provided consistent with the EPA’s implementing regulations in 40 CFR 51.102. Specifically, CARB provided public notice and opportunity for public comment prior to its July 25, 2024 public hearing on and adoption of the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments.6 The SIP submission includes proof of publication notices for the public hearing and includes copies of the written and oral comments received during the State’s public review processes and CARB’s responses thereto.7 Therefore, we find that the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments meet the procedural requirements for public notice and hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102. ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 II. Public Comments and EPA Responses The public comment period for the proposed rulemakings opened on July 8, 2024, the date of publication of both proposals in the Federal Register, and closed on August 7, 2024. During this period, the EPA received five comment submissions in response to the proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments, including two comment submissions from anonymous commenters,8 one comment submission from a private citizen,9 one comment from an environmental consultant,10 and one comment letter from CARB.11 5 Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 2024 and supplement submitted electronically October 7, 2024). 6 CARB, ‘‘Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the San Joaquin Valley 2024 State Implementation Plan for the 2012 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard, to Consider Amendments to the Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure and the 1997 15 mg/ m3 State Implementation Plan Revision, and to Hear an Implementation Update on the 2018 PM2.5 Plan,’’ dated June 14, 2024. 7 J&K Court Reporting, LLC, ‘‘Meeting, State of California, Air Resources Board, Zoom Platform,’’ July 25, 2024 (transcript of CARB’s public hearing), and CARB, ‘‘Board Meeting Comments Log and Comments posted that were presented during the Hearing’’ (written comments received). 8 Anonymous comment received July 20, 2024, to Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301; and anonymous comment received July 27, 2024, to Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301. 9 Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, from Dennis Tristao to Docket No. EPA–R09– OAR–2024–0301. 10 Email dated June 28, 2024, including an attachment, from Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA Region IX. 11 Comment letter dated and received August 5, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 Three of the five comment submissions generally supported our proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments 12 and the remaining two comments were not germane to our action.13 We did not receive any comments that opposed EPA’s proposed approval of the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments. All five comments are included in the docket for the proposed action.14 The EPA received nine comment submissions in response to the proposal to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, including three comment submissions from private citizens; 15 a comment submission from a university professor; 16 a comment submission from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe (‘‘Santa Rosa Rancheria’’); 17 a comment submission from the Citizens Advisory Committee, a group representing industry, environmental, and city interests in the San Joaquin Valley; 18 a comment submission from CARB; 19 a comment submission from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or ‘‘District’’); 20 and a comment to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9. 12 The three sets of comments supporting our proposal include those from an anonymous commenter received July 27, 2024, those from CARB, and those from the private citizen. 13 The two sets of comments that are not germane to our proposal include those from an anonymous commenter received July 20, 2024, and those from the environmental consultant. 14 https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09OAR-2024-0301/comments. 15 Email dated June 28, 2024, including an attachment, from Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA Region IX; comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, from Dennis Tristao to Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250; comment received July 27, 2024, with attachment, from Emily Brandt to Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250. 16 Comment received July 26, 2024, from Ian Faloona, UC Davis Air Quality Research Center/ Land, Air, & Water Resources Department, titled ‘‘Comments on ‘Review of San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard’ by CARB, June 14, 2024.’’ 17 Comment letter dated July 23, 2024, and received July 29, 2024, from Leo Sisco, Tribal Chairman, Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX. 18 Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, from Ben Cantu, Chair, Citizens Advisory Committee, to EPA Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR– 2024–0250, Subject: ‘‘RE: Docket No. EPA–R09– OAR–2024–0250, Attainment Date Extension for the San Joaquin Valley, California 1997 Annual PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area.’’ 19 Comment letter dated and received August 5, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9. 20 Comment letter dated and received August 6, 2024, from Sheraz Gill, Deputy APCO, SJVUAPCD, to Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250, Subject: ‘‘RE: Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250, PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 submission from a coalition of eight environmental and community organizations (collectively referred to herein as ‘‘Central California Asthma Collaborative’’ or CCAC).21 All nine comment submissions are included in the docket for the proposed action.22 Of the nine comment submissions provided in response to the proposal to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, four of the comments generally support the EPA’s proposal to grant the extension 23 and three of the comments were not germane to our action.24 25 The supportive and nongermane comments do not require a response. We respond to the remaining two sets of comments received on our July 8, 2024 proposed rule herein. A. Comments From CCAC Comment 1: CCAC comments that the Valley has a history of poor air quality and of failing to attain the various NAAQS by their respective deadlines. Attainment Date Extension for the San Joaquin Valley, California 1997 Annual PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area.’’ 21 Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, including an attachment, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region 9. The eight environmental and community organizations, in order of appearance in the letter, are the Central California Asthma Collaborative, the Central California Environmental Justice Network, the Central Valley Air Quality Coalition, Earthjustice, the LEAP Institute, the Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Little Manila Rising, and Sierra Club Tehipite Chapter. 22 https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09OAR-2024-0250/comments. 23 The four sets of comments supporting our proposal include those from the private citizen commenter received August 7, 2024, those from the Citizens Advisory Committee, those from CARB, and those from SJVUAPCD. 24 The three sets of comments that are not germane to our action include those from the private citizen commenter received on June 28, 2024, those received from a private citizen commenter on July 27, 2024, and those from the university professor. 25 One of the comments titled ‘‘Comments on ‘Review of San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard’ by CARB, June 14, 2024’’ concerns PM2.5 concentrations in San Joaquin Valley; however, the title of the comment and the analysis therein indicates that it is directed at the State’s attainment plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The comment presents evidence that purports to show that the State’s attainment modeling for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is flawed; however such modeling is not relevant to this action that concerns whether the State has met the requirements for a one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, the comment is not germane to this action and does not necessitate any further response at this time. The EPA will review the State’s attainment plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and the EPA’s regulations, and will determine, following notice-and-comment rulemaking, whether the submission satisfies all applicable CAA requirements. We encourage the commenter to resubmit these comments as appropriate during such a future rulemaking. E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations Citing PM2.5 design values for 2018– 2020, 2019–2021, and 2020–2022 of 17.6 mg/m3, 17.8 mg/m3, and 18.8 mg/m3, CCAC claims that PM2.5 concentrations have not improved and remain well above the 15 mg/m3 level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. CCAC also states that ‘‘EPA [has] correctly recognized the environmental injustice San Joaquin Valley residents endure’’ and summarizes findings from the EPA’s prior environmental justice (EJ) analyses for the area. Response 1: The EPA acknowledges that there are communities with EJ concerns in the San Joaquin Valley and does not dispute the challenges associated with attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in this area. We also acknowledge that the Demographic Index analysis the EPA discussed in the proposal to grant the extension of the attainment date indicates that the indices that reflect the area’s percent minority and percent low-income populations are above the national averages for those indices.26 Nevertheless, the CAA provides states the opportunity to request an extension of the applicable attainment date for a nonattainment area if they meet certain statutory criteria, including that the area met the air quality standard in question in the year leading up to the applicable attainment date.27 CCAC also expressed concern that PM2.5 concentrations in the Valley have not improved in recent years, and that this pattern should weigh against the extension of the attainment date. The EPA must assess whether to grant the attainment date extension in light of the statutory criteria. We note that CCAC relies on design values 28 to evaluate the pace of improvement in the area. However, design values, which reflect the annual average over a three-year period, are not the metric that EPA uses to determine whether a state qualifies for a one-year attainment date extension. Rather, pursuant to section 172(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the EPA looks to the monitor data in the year leading up to the attainment date (i.e., in this case, calendar year 2023) to assess an area’s recent progress. As discussed in the proposal to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date, the EPA reviewed 2023 annual mean concentrations at each of the regulatory monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley and determined that such data indicate that PM2.5 concentrations were 26 89 FR 55901, 55909. section 172(a)(2)(C). 28 For information about how the EPA calculates design values, see 40 CFR 50.7 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, section 4.1(b). 27 CAA VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 below the 15.0 mg/m3 level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.29 Moreover, 2023 annual mean concentrations were lower than annual mean concentrations in 2021 and 2022, indicating an improvement in air quality conditions in 2023 relative to previous years.30 This is true even without considering potential impacts from any exceptional events during that timeframe.31 32 The EPA notes that while this final action extends the attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS to December 31, 2024, the area will remain classified as Serious nonattainment for those NAAQS and is not relieved of any planning obligations under the CAA. Following the December 31, 2024 attainment date, the State and the EPA will assess whether the area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If the area has met the NAAQS, the EPA will make a determination that the area attained by the attainment date. If the area has not met the NAAQS, the State may request a second one-year extension if the area meets the CAA requirements for such an extension. If the State does not qualify for, or the EPA denies a request for, a second oneyear extension under CAA section 172, then the EPA will issue a finding of failure to attain and the State will become subject to additional CAA requirements to achieve attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley area. Comment 2.A: CCAC asserts that the EPA does not have authority to grant a one-year extension of the attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C). Specifically, CCAC notes that subpart 4 of Part D of Title I 29 89 FR 55901, 55909. AQS Design Value Report, AMP480, accessed May 17, 2024 (User ID: STSAI, Report Request ID: 2193813). 31 Exceptional Events are unusual or naturally occurring events that can affect air quality but are not reasonably controllable using techniques that tribal, state or local air agencies may implement in order to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Exceptional events may include wildfires, high wind dust events, prescribed fires, stratospheric ozone intrusions, and volcanic and seismic activities. 32 In the May 14, 2024, letter submitting documentation to support the State’s request for an attainment date extension, the District noted that they and CARB ‘‘are evaluating potential documentation to remove exceptional events (including wildfire impacts) from the 2021–2023 period, as allowed under the CAA and EPA policies.’’ Letter dated May 14, 2024, from Samir Sheikh, Executive Director/APCO, SJVUAPCD, to Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, Subject: ‘‘RE: Attainment Date Extension for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard for the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area.’’ 30 EPA PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 91265 of the Act provides for attainment date extensions for PM2.5 nonattainment areas under specific circumstances under section 188, and thus section 188 controls the question of whether the EPA can grant an attainment date extension for a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area that fails to attain by the applicable attainment date. CCAC asserts that attainment date extensions for Serious nonattainment areas are addressed by CAA section 188(e), that California did not request such an extension, and that therefore such extension is not available at this time to the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Response 2.A: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that the attainment date extension provisions under CAA section 188 control the present action. As CCAC accurately explains, the EPA reclassified the San Joaquin Valley as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS effective May 7, 2015.33 The following year, the EPA found that the San Joaquin Valley failed to attain by the applicable Serious attainment date and that sections 179(d) and 189(d) of the CAA governed all subsequent plan requirements and attainment deadlines.34 Crucially, following a finding of failure to attain for a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area, CAA section 189(d) does not provide for a specific attainment date, and it instead requires: [T]he State in which such area is located shall, after notice and opportunity for public comment, submit within 12 months after the applicable attainment date, plan revisions which provide for attainment of the [PM2.5] air quality standard and, from the date of such submission until attainment for an annual reduction in [PM2.5] or [PM2.5] precursor emissions within the area of not less than 5 percent of the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory prepared for such area.35 With respect to the new applicable attainment date for an area governed by CAA section 189(d), the EPA explained in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule 36 that: [T]he final rule includes the overarching requirement for a Serious area that failed to attain by the previous attainment date to establish a new date for attaining the standard as expeditiously as practicable. However, neither CAA section 189(d) nor other sections in subpart 4 explicitly establish or provide the authority to establish a new attainment date for the area. Therefore, once an area is beyond the attainment dates that Congress specified in subpart 4 for the 33 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015). FR 84481 (November 23, 2016). 35 CAA section 189(d). 36 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016). 34 81 E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 91266 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 PM10 NAAQS, the EPA must look to other provisions of part D of the CAA to provide authority for a new attainment date. Sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2) of the CAA provide generally applicable attainment dates that fill the gap in the statute left for areas subject to the requirements of CAA section 189(d). Thus, for a PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to CAA section 189(d) requirements, the EPA must establish a new attainment date according to the provisions of CAA section 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2). The EPA has followed this same approach in the past for PM10 nonattainment areas governed by subpart 4 nonattainment requirements.37 Thus, subpart 4 controls the requirements for an attainment plan under CAA section 189(d); however, after a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area fails to attain by the attainment date, the applicable attainment date for a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to the requirements of CAA section 189(d) is controlled by the generally applicable provisions in subpart 1 of part D, CAA section 172. Contrary to the commenter’s assertion, section 172 explicitly provides for the extension that the EPA is finalizing as part of this action. The commenter cites CAA section 172(a)(2)(D), which states, ‘‘[t]his paragraph shall not apply with respect to nonattainment areas for which attainment dates are specifically provided under other provisions of this part.’’ But as explained above, the attainment date for an attainment plan required under CAA section 189(d) is not specifically provided under the provisions in subpart 4, which is why the EPA relied on section 172 in setting the December 31, 2023 attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley.38 Because CAA section 172 controls for purposes of setting an attainment date for a plan required under CAA section 189(d), it is logical and reasonable that the generally applicable provisions in section 172 would control an extension of that attainment date in the absence of any specific authority in subpart 4 for such extensions. Comment 2.B: CCAC claims that the EPA evaluates the State’s request for an attainment date extension pursuant to EPA guidance on the implementation of CAA section 188(d), which concerns attainment date extensions for Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas, and asserts that the EPA does not have authority to apply such provisions to a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area. Response 2.B: The EPA is not granting the extension pursuant to section 188(d) of the Act. Rather, because section 172(a)(2)(C) does not have PM-specific 37 Id. 38 81 at 58106. FR 84481, 84482. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 provisions and because the EPA has not issued guidance on how to implement the provisions of section 172(a)(2)(C) relevant to this particular question of the criteria for an extension of the attainment date for an PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to section 189(d), the EPA looked to guidance on the extension provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas under CAA section 188(d) in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, given that ‘‘section 188(d) is nearly identical to CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).’’ 39 While we did not assert that 188(d) controls in this situation, we did ‘‘consider[ ] the guidance pertaining to the one-year extension requirements under CAA section 188(d) to persuasively inform the requirements for a one-year extension for a particulate matter nonattainment area under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).’’ 40 Comment 2.C: CCAC further claims that ‘‘[t]he D.C. Circuit has rejected EPA’s attempt to implement the PM2.5 standard under Subpart 1.’’ Response 2.C: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that reliance on the generally applicable provisions in CAA section 172 to fill a gap in subpart 4 indicates that the EPA is improperly implementing a PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 1. To the contrary, the EPA implements the PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the relevant provisions of both subpart 1 and subpart 4, and subpart 1 provisions continue to apply unless specifically overridden or revised by subpart 4. As we stated in our proposal, the EPA does not dispute that section 189(d) is the controlling provision for Serious areas that, like the San Joaquin Valley, fail to attain a PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.41 Instead, the EPA is implementing the PM2.5 standard under subpart 4 and subpart 1, in keeping with EPA’s longstanding interpretation that the statutory provisions of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179(d)(3) govern the attainment date for new plans required under CAA section 189(d) for areas that previously failed to attain by the Serious area attainment date.42 39 89 FR 55901, 55904. 40 Id. 41 ‘‘Following a January 4, 2013 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit . . . the EPA acknowledged that states must meet both subpart 1 and subpart 4 requirements in nonattainment plan SIP submissions for the 1997 24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS.’’ Id. at 55903. 42 See, e.g., 72 FR 31183 (June 6, 2007) (finding that the Phoenix PM10 Serious nonattainment area failed to attain the standard by the December 31, 2006 attainment deadline and implementing the new attainment date for an attainment plan under CAA section 189(d) pursuant to sections 172 and 179). PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Comment 2.D: CCAC asserts that the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule and the EPA’s implementing regulations under 40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibit California from requesting an extension of the December 31, 2023 applicable attainment deadline, and thus EPA approval of this one-year extension request would violate the EPA’s own implementing regulations and is arbitrary and capricious. Response 2.D: The EPA disagrees that 40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibits the proposed attainment date extension. The EPA’s regulations under 40 CFR 51.1005 concern extensions of the applicable attainment date for Moderate and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Applicable attainment dates for PM2.5 nonattainment areas are initially set under 40 CFR 51.1004, and 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(1) and (a)(2) follow the mandates in CAA sections 188(c)(1) and (c)(2), the CAA sections governing the setting of Moderate and Serious attainment dates, respectively. Likewise, 40 CFR 51.1005(a) and (b) follow the requirements of CAA sections 188(d) and (e), respectively, as the primary sections governing extensions of the applicable attainment date for Moderate and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas. In contrast, the authority for the requirements in 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3) governing nonattainment areas subject to CAA section 189(d) for failure to attain by the applicable Serious area attainment date comes from CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), not section 188. As explained in Response 2.A, CAA section 172 controls for purposes of setting an attainment date for a plan required under CAA section 189(d) because the provisions of subpart 4, including section 188(c), do not specifically provide authority for establishing attainment dates for 189(d) attainment plans. Because a state required to adopt and submit a 189(d) plan is subject to the attainment date requirements of CAA section 172(a)(2),43 40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibits a state subject to section 189(d) from applying for an extension of the applicable attainment date in excess of that which is permitted for an attainment plan under section 189(d). For example, a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to section 189(d) may not apply for an extension of the applicable attainment date under section 188(e). Thus, the EPA believes 43 I.e., the nonattainment area must attain the relevant standard as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years from date of designation, with the possibility of setting the date 10 years from the date of designation under certain circumstances, and with the possibility of additional extensions of two one-year periods under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C). E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 the proposed attainment date extension, which was made in accordance with CAA sections 189(d) and 172, is consistent with the relevant CAA provisions and the EPA’s implementing regulations. Comment 3: CCAC comments that ‘‘[i]nstead of proposing to approve an illegal and unauthorized one-year extension, EPA should have made an attainment finding.’’ CCAC asserts that the EPA has a duty to make an attainment finding within six months of the attainment date, citing CAA sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) and that the EPA instead proposes to extend the attainment date without authority to do so. Response 3: As explained in Responses 1 and 2, we believe a oneyear extension is appropriate in this situation and authorized by the CAA if a state meets the statutory preconditions. In our proposal, the EPA proposed to determine that the State has satisfied the criteria for a one-year extension under CAA section 172 for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley area, and if finalized the EPA would no longer be required under CAA section 179(c) to make a finding as to whether the area attained by the December 31, 2023 attainment date. The EPA notes that it will again have an obligation under CAA section 179 to make a determination as to whether the San Joaquin Valley attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS following the extended December 31, 2024 attainment date. If the air quality data indicate that the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area did not attain by the December 31, 2024 attainment date, and if the State does not qualify for, or the EPA denies a request for, a second one-year extension under CAA section 172, then the EPA will issue a finding of failure to attain at such time in accordance with CAA section 179(c). B. Comments From Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe Comment 4: Santa Rosa Rancheria notes that the San Joaquin Valley has not attained the standard in nearly three decades and opposes an extension due to the commenter’s concerns that the SIP is not proving effective in bringing the area into attainment. Response 4: As discussed in Response 1, the EPA is evaluating the requested extension of the attainment date in light of the relevant statutory criteria. With respect to the air quality criterion of CAA section 172(a)(2)(C)(ii), the EPA has determined that the 2023 annual mean PM2.5 concentration data from each of the regulatory monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 PM2.5 concentrations were below the 15.0 mg/m3 level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, reflecting an improvement in air quality relative to prior years. Based in part on our review of these data, we have determined that the State has met the requirements under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) for a one-year extension of the attainment date. The EPA will continue to monitor the area’s progress towards attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and will make a finding as to whether the area attained the NAAQS following the applicable extended attainment date. Comment 5: Santa Rosa Rancheria expresses concern that elevated PM2.5 levels are correlated with premature mortality rates, aggravated respiratory and cardiovascular disease, changes in lung function, and increased respiratory and cardiovascular symptoms. Response 5: The EPA agrees that epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and adverse health outcomes, including premature mortality. While this action to approve a SIP revision and grant a one-year extension of the attainment date is not expected to reduce PM2.5 levels in the San Joaquin Valley, the EPA notes that the area is also designated nonattainment for the more stringent 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is subject to additional requirements to meet those NAAQS. As a result, the State will be continuing its efforts to adopt and implement additional control measures that will continue to improve ambient PM2.5 levels in the San Joaquin Valley. On August 22, 2024, California submitted a revised attainment plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, which includes, among other things, the State’s control strategy to achieve reductions in direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors to bring the area into attainment of those NAAQS.44 While the EPA has not yet taken action on the revised plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, we expect that implementation of the plan will yield additional reductions in PM2.5 concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley. Comment 6: The Santa Rosa Rancheria notes that it monitors its own air quality, and based on the data it has collected, Santa Rosa Rancheria challenges the representativeness of the data relied upon by the State and the EPA. Santa Rosa Rancheria states that 44 Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 2024, and supplement submitted electronically October 7, 2024). PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 91267 ‘‘[a]ccording to the Tribe’s Air Quality Monitoring Program, from multiple locations around the Rancheria, as seen in the attachment, the PM2.5 averages well above 25 mg/m3. This data is reported on the AQS database. Exposure levels over 12.0 mg/m3 are considered unsafe. The Tribe’s data shows the level consistently double that level.’’ Response 6: As discussed in our proposal, the EPA relies on complete, quality-assured data gathered at established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations in a nonattainment area and entered into the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database to determine if an area meets the requirement under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) that the area had clean data for the relevant standard in the calendar year preceding the applicable attainment date.45 In evaluating Santa Rosa Rancheria’s comments, the EPA has reviewed data collected by the Tribe that is available in AQS. These data indicate that Santa Rosa Rancheria reports data from one monitoring site (AQS ID: 06–031–0500) that measures ozone, PM10, and several meteorological parameters.46 PM2.5 data from this site are not available in AQS.47 Santa Rosa Rancheria’s comment letter notes an attachment that appeared to be inadvertently omitted from the comment submission. The EPA followed up with Santa Rosa Rancheria regarding the data referenced in its letter, and in response, Santa Rosa Rancheria provided data files to the EPA that include PM2.5 data collected by monitors on tribal land in 2021 and 2022.48 We appreciate the Tribe sharing PM2.5 data from its monitoring network with the EPA. However, because these data are not complete, quality-assured data collected at regulatory monitoring sites that meet EPA requirements 49 and report to the EPA’s AQS database, these data are not eligible for comparison to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, these data collected in 2021–2022 were collected outside the timeframe relevant for the attainment date extension (i.e., 2023). While not directly relevant to this particular action, the EPA recognizes the 45 89 FR 55901, 55907. AQS Design Value Report, AMP435, accessed August 20, 2024 (User ID: XLEBARRY, Report Request ID: 2217065). 47 Id. 48 Email dated September 4, 2024, from George Bernard, Environmental Director, Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, to Lily Lee, Assistant Director, Air & Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, with 84 attachments. 49 Regulatory monitoring requires adherence to 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58 and the related appendices and the use of designated federal reference or federal equivalent methods. 46 EPA E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 91268 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations importance of these supplemental data and commends the Tribe for its collection and use of these data to help identify sources and inform real-time decision-making to minimize PM2.5 exposures in the community. Comment 7: The Tribe asserts that research has shown that there is a strong correlation between farming and animal husbandry and elevated levels of ambient PM2.5. The Tribe states that a majority of the land in the San Joaquin Valley is used for agriculture and that because the Tribe is surrounded by agriculture, the air quality on Tribal land is more representative of the nonattainment area than data collected in more urban areas. Response 7: As discussed in Response 6, the PM2.5 monitoring data collected by Santa Rosa Rancheria does not meet the EPA’s regulatory requirements for comparison with the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and were collected outside the timeframe relevant for this action. Therefore, these data are not directly relevant to the EPA’s evaluation of whether the State has met the requirements for a one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Regarding the correlation between farming and animal husbandry and elevated levels of PM2.5, we note that CARB and the District are engaged in several research efforts to better understand the emissions from these source categories. For example, in spring of 2024, CARB convened a subject matter expert review panel to evaluate existing data and science on NOX and ammonia emissions from soils in California.50 CARB has also been engaged in compiling California-specific dairy activity data and related emissions trends.51 While not directly relevant to this action, we anticipate that such research studies will help inform continued efforts to reduce PM2.5 exposures from agricultural activities for residents in the San Joaquin Valley. ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 III. Environmental Justice Considerations As described in detail in our proposals, the EPA reviewed environmental and demographic data for the San Joaquin Valley using the EPA’s EJ screening and mapping tool (‘‘EJSCREEN’’) 52 53 and compared the 50 For more information, see https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/ eiareasource/1.%2023RD017%20Public%20Kickoff %20CARB%20Intro.pdf. 51 For more information, see https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/CARB_ Dairy_Sector_Workshop_Staff_Presentation_08-222024.pdf. 52 EJSCREEN provides a nationally consistent dataset and approach for combining environmental VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 data to the corresponding data for the United States as a whole. The results of the analysis are provided for informational and transparency purposes and are not a basis for the EPA’s action. IV. Final Action For the reasons discussed in our proposed rules and herein, the EPA is finalizing our approval of the 15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments as a revision to the California SIP. In doing so, we are approving the State’s amendment to the Valley Incentive Measure for the purposes of emissions reductions in 2023 and the State’s revision to the aggregate tonnage commitment in the 15 mg/m3 SIP Revision to reflect that it has been satisfied by the Valley Incentive Measure. We are also approving the State’s demonstration that the Valley Incentive Measure has achieved emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX and 0.27 tpd of direct PM2.5 in the year 2023 and crediting those reductions toward the emissions reduction commitment in the California SIP. Additionally, in response to a request from the State of California on May 23, 2024, the EPA is granting a one-year extension to the applicable attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. This final action to extend the applicable attainment date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, for this nonattainment area is based on the State’s compliance with the requirements in the applicable SIP for the area and on the 2023 PM2.5 monitoring data from sites in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this final action merely approves a state plan as meeting federal requirements and grants a state request for an attainment date extension consistent with federal requirements and does not impose additional and demographic indicators. EJSCREEN is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen/what-ejscreen. The EPA used EJSCREEN to obtain environmental and demographic indicators representing each of the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley. 53 EPA Region IX, ‘‘EJSCREEN Analysis for the Eight Counties of the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area,’’ August 2022. PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 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 approves 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 CAA. 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 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, 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. Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) builds on and supplements E.O. 12898 and defines EJ as, among other things, ‘‘the just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of income, race, color, national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations decision-making and other Federal activities that affect human health and the environment.’’ The State did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. Consistent with the EPA’s discretion under the CAA, the EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is described above in the section titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice Considerations.’’ The analysis was done for the purpose of providing additional context and information about this rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the action. Due to the nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral impact on the air quality of the affected area. In addition, there is no information in the record upon which this decision is based inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving EJ for communities with EJ concerns. This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 21, 2025. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: November 2, 2024. Martha Guzman Aceves, Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Nov 18, 2024 Jkt 265001 91269 PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: [EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0545; FRL–12100– 02–R5] 40 CFR Part 52 ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F—California Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Second Period Regional Haze Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding and reserving paragraphs (c)(620) through (622), and adding paragraph (c)(623) to read as follows: ■ § 52.220 Identification of plan—in part. * * * * * (c) * * * (620)–(622) [Reserved] (623) The following plan revisions were submitted electronically on August 22, 2024, by the Governor’s designee as an attachment to a letter of the same date. (i) [Reserved] (ii) Additional materials. (A) California Air Resources Board. (1) Selected portions titled ‘‘Amendments to the 15 mg/m3 SIP Revision and Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard,’’ and ‘‘Appendix B: 2022 Annual Demonstration Report: San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure Covering Projects Completed Through 12/31/2022,’’ of the Staff Report, ‘‘Review of the San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 2012 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard and Amendments to the Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure and the 1997 15 mg/m3 State Implementation Plan Revision,’’ adopted July 25, 2024. (2) The portion of CARB Resolution 24–10, dated July 25, 2024, adopting amendments to the Valley Incentive Measure to include quantification of emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX and 0.27 tpd of PM2.5 in the year 2023 from existing agricultural equipment projects and substituting the reductions from the Valley Incentive Measure to meet the aggregate emissions reduction commitment in the attainment plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS approved in 40 CFR 52.220(c)(537)(ii)(A)(9). (B) [Reserved] * * * * * [FR Doc. 2024–25946 Filed 11–18–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin or WDNR) on July 30, 2021, along with subsequent information discussed herein, as satisfying applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s Regional Haze Rule (RHR) for the program’s second implementation period. Wisconsin’s SIP submission and the subsequent information addresses the requirement that states must periodically revise their long-term strategies for making reasonable progress towards the national goal of preventing any future, and remedying any existing, anthropogenic impairment of visibility, including regional haze, in mandatory Class I Federal areas. The SIP submission also addresses other applicable requirements for the second implementation period of the regional haze program. EPA is taking this action pursuant to sections 110 and 169A of the CAA. DATES: This final rule is effective on December 19, 2024. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0545. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Charles SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 91263-91269]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25946]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250 and EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301; FRL-12006-02-R9]


Air Plan Approval and Attainment Date Extension; 1997 Annual Fine 
Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; San Joaquin Valley, California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing 
approval of a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements 
for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the San 
Joaquin Valley ``Serious'' nonattainment area. The EPA is also 
finalizing a one-year extension of the applicable attainment date from 
December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, nonattainment area 
based on our evaluation of air quality monitoring data and the 
extension request and supporting information submitted by the State of 
California.

DATES: This rule is effective on December 19, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket 
ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250 and EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301. All documents 
in the dockets are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. 
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability 
information. If you need assistance in a language other than English or 
if you are a person with 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: Ashley Graham, Geographic Strategies 
and Modeling Section (AIR-2-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972-3877; email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' 
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Summary of the Proposed Actions
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
    A. Comments From CCAC
    B. Comments From Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe
III. Environmental Justice Considerations
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of the Proposed Actions

    On July 8, 2024, the EPA proposed two actions related to the CAA 
requirements for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San 
Joaquin Valley Serious nonattainment area.
    In the first action, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA proposed 
to approve through parallel processing the ``Amendments to the 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision and Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure 
for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard'' (``15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments'') as a revision to the California SIP.\1\ The 15 [micro]g/
m\3\ Plan Amendments seek to amend a SIP-approved measure, the 
``Accelerated Turnover of Agricultural Equipment Incentive Projects'' 
(``Valley Incentive Measure''), to include a quantification of the 
emissions reductions for the year 2023 from existing agricultural 
equipment projects from the California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) 
Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program (``Carl 
Moyer'') and CARB's Funding Agricultural Replacement Measures for 
Emission Reductions (FARMER) program and seek EPA approval of those 
emission reductions for SIP credit. The 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments also seek to revise the aggregate tonnage commitment in the 
attainment plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., the 
``Attainment Plan Revision for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 
Standard'' (``15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision'')) by replacing it with a 
commitment to achieve the same reductions from the Valley Incentive 
Measure. As part of the EPA's proposal to approve the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ 
Plan Amendments, we proposed to approve the State's demonstration that 
the Valley Incentive Measure has achieved emissions reductions of 5.0 
tons per day (tpd) of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 0.27 tpd of 
direct PM2.5 in the year 2023, and proposed to credit the 
reductions as a substitute measure to meet the aggregate tonnage 
commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 89 FR 55896 (July 8, 2024).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the second action, based in part on our proposal to approve the 
15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments, the EPA proposed to grant 
California's request for a one-year extension of the applicable 
attainment date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, 
nonattainment area.\3\ The proposed action to extend the applicable 
attainment date for this nonattainment area was based on the EPA's 
evaluation of air quality monitoring data and extension request 
submitted by the State of California, and our determination that the 
State has satisfied the two statutory criteria for a one-year extension 
under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C): The State has complied with all 
requirements and commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable 
implementation plan, and in accordance with guidance published by the 
Administrator, no more than the minimal number of exceedances of the 
relevant national ambient air quality standard has occurred in the area 
in the year preceding the Extension Year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 89 FR 55901 (July 8, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For details regarding the EPA's reasons for proposing to approve 
the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments and to grant the one-year 
extension, please see the July 8, 2024 proposal notices.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 89 FR 55896 and 89 FR 55901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 22, 2024, California submitted the final version of the 
15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments to the EPA as a

[[Page 91264]]

revision to the California SIP.\5\ We have reviewed this submittal and 
find that it fulfills the SIP completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, 
Appendix V. The SIP submission also includes evidence that adequate 
public notice was given and that an opportunity for a public hearing 
was provided consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations in 40 
CFR 51.102. Specifically, CARB provided public notice and opportunity 
for public comment prior to its July 25, 2024 public hearing on and 
adoption of the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments.\6\ The SIP submission 
includes proof of publication notices for the public hearing and 
includes copies of the written and oral comments received during the 
State's public review processes and CARB's responses thereto.\7\ 
Therefore, we find that the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments meet the 
procedural requirements for public notice and hearing in CAA sections 
110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, 
EPA Region 9, with enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 
2024 and supplement submitted electronically October 7, 2024).
    \6\ CARB, ``Notice of Public Meeting to Consider the San Joaquin 
Valley 2024 State Implementation Plan for the 2012 12 [micro]g/m\3\ 
Annual PM2.5 Standard, to Consider Amendments to the 
Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure and the 1997 15 [micro]g/
m\3\ State Implementation Plan Revision, and to Hear an 
Implementation Update on the 2018 PM2.5 Plan,'' dated 
June 14, 2024.
    \7\ J&K Court Reporting, LLC, ``Meeting, State of California, 
Air Resources Board, Zoom Platform,'' July 25, 2024 (transcript of 
CARB's public hearing), and CARB, ``Board Meeting Comments Log and 
Comments posted that were presented during the Hearing'' (written 
comments received).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The public comment period for the proposed rulemakings opened on 
July 8, 2024, the date of publication of both proposals in the Federal 
Register, and closed on August 7, 2024. During this period, the EPA 
received five comment submissions in response to the proposal to 
approve the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments, including two comment 
submissions from anonymous commenters,\8\ one comment submission from a 
private citizen,\9\ one comment from an environmental consultant,\10\ 
and one comment letter from CARB.\11\ Three of the five comment 
submissions generally supported our proposal to approve the 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments \12\ and the remaining two comments were 
not germane to our action.\13\ We did not receive any comments that 
opposed EPA's proposed approval of the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments. All five comments are included in the docket for the 
proposed action.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Anonymous comment received July 20, 2024, to Docket ID No. 
EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301; and anonymous comment received July 27, 2024, 
to Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301.
    \9\ Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, from 
Dennis Tristao to Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301.
    \10\ Email dated June 28, 2024, including an attachment, from 
Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA Region IX.
    \11\ Comment letter dated and received August 5, 2024, from 
Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional 
Administrator, EPA Region 9.
    \12\ The three sets of comments supporting our proposal include 
those from an anonymous commenter received July 27, 2024, those from 
CARB, and those from the private citizen.
    \13\ The two sets of comments that are not germane to our 
proposal include those from an anonymous commenter received July 20, 
2024, and those from the environmental consultant.
    \14\ https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0301/comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA received nine comment submissions in response to the 
proposal to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, including three comment submissions 
from private citizens; \15\ a comment submission from a university 
professor; \16\ a comment submission from the Santa Rosa Rancheria 
Tachi Yokut Tribe (``Santa Rosa Rancheria''); \17\ a comment submission 
from the Citizens Advisory Committee, a group representing industry, 
environmental, and city interests in the San Joaquin Valley; \18\ a 
comment submission from CARB; \19\ a comment submission from the San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or 
``District''); \20\ and a comment submission from a coalition of eight 
environmental and community organizations (collectively referred to 
herein as ``Central California Asthma Collaborative'' or CCAC).\21\ All 
nine comment submissions are included in the docket for the proposed 
action.\22\ Of the nine comment submissions provided in response to the 
proposal to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, four of the comments generally 
support the EPA's proposal to grant the extension \23\ and three of the 
comments were not germane to our action.24 25 The supportive 
and non-germane comments do not require a response. We respond to the 
remaining two sets of comments received on our July 8, 2024 proposed 
rule herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Email dated June 28, 2024, including an attachment, from 
Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA Region IX; comment letter dated and 
received August 7, 2024, from Dennis Tristao to Docket No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0250; comment received July 27, 2024, with attachment, from 
Emily Brandt to Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250.
    \16\ Comment received July 26, 2024, from Ian Faloona, UC Davis 
Air Quality Research Center/Land, Air, & Water Resources Department, 
titled ``Comments on `Review of San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 
12 [micro]g/m\3\ Annual PM2.5 Standard' by CARB, June 14, 
2024.''
    \17\ Comment letter dated July 23, 2024, and received July 29, 
2024, from Leo Sisco, Tribal Chairman, Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi 
Yokut Tribe, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX.
    \18\ Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, from Ben 
Cantu, Chair, Citizens Advisory Committee, to EPA Docket No. EPA-
R09-OAR-2024-0250, Subject: ``RE: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250, 
Attainment Date Extension for the San Joaquin Valley, California 
1997 Annual PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment 
Area.''
    \19\ Comment letter dated and received August 5, 2024, from 
Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional 
Administrator, EPA Region 9.
    \20\ Comment letter dated and received August 6, 2024, from 
Sheraz Gill, Deputy APCO, SJVUAPCD, to Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-
0250, Subject: ``RE: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250, Attainment 
Date Extension for the San Joaquin Valley, California 1997 Annual 
PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area.''
    \21\ Comment letter dated and received August 7, 2024, including 
an attachment, to Ashley Graham, EPA Region 9. The eight 
environmental and community organizations, in order of appearance in 
the letter, are the Central California Asthma Collaborative, the 
Central California Environmental Justice Network, the Central Valley 
Air Quality Coalition, Earthjustice, the LEAP Institute, the 
Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Little Manila 
Rising, and Sierra Club Tehipite Chapter.
    \22\ https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250/comments.
    \23\ The four sets of comments supporting our proposal include 
those from the private citizen commenter received August 7, 2024, 
those from the Citizens Advisory Committee, those from CARB, and 
those from SJVUAPCD.
    \24\ The three sets of comments that are not germane to our 
action include those from the private citizen commenter received on 
June 28, 2024, those received from a private citizen commenter on 
July 27, 2024, and those from the university professor.
    \25\ One of the comments titled ``Comments on `Review of San 
Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 12 [micro]g/m\3\ Annual 
PM2.5 Standard' by CARB, June 14, 2024'' concerns 
PM2.5 concentrations in San Joaquin Valley; however, the 
title of the comment and the analysis therein indicates that it is 
directed at the State's attainment plan for the 2012 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS. The comment presents evidence that purports 
to show that the State's attainment modeling for the 2012 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS is flawed; however such modeling is not 
relevant to this action that concerns whether the State has met the 
requirements for a one-year extension of the attainment date for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, the comment is not germane 
to this action and does not necessitate any further response at this 
time. The EPA will review the State's attainment plan for the 2012 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS for compliance with the requirements 
of the CAA and the EPA's regulations, and will determine, following 
notice-and-comment rulemaking, whether the submission satisfies all 
applicable CAA requirements. We encourage the commenter to resubmit 
these comments as appropriate during such a future rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Comments From CCAC

    Comment 1: CCAC comments that the Valley has a history of poor air 
quality and of failing to attain the various NAAQS by their respective 
deadlines.

[[Page 91265]]

Citing PM2.5 design values for 2018-2020, 2019-2021, and 
2020-2022 of 17.6 [micro]g/m\3\, 17.8 [micro]g/m\3\, and 18.8 [micro]g/
m\3\, CCAC claims that PM2.5 concentrations have not 
improved and remain well above the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ level of the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. CCAC also states that ``EPA [has] 
correctly recognized the environmental injustice San Joaquin Valley 
residents endure'' and summarizes findings from the EPA's prior 
environmental justice (EJ) analyses for the area.
    Response 1: The EPA acknowledges that there are communities with EJ 
concerns in the San Joaquin Valley and does not dispute the challenges 
associated with attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 
this area. We also acknowledge that the Demographic Index analysis the 
EPA discussed in the proposal to grant the extension of the attainment 
date indicates that the indices that reflect the area's percent 
minority and percent low-income populations are above the national 
averages for those indices.\26\ Nevertheless, the CAA provides states 
the opportunity to request an extension of the applicable attainment 
date for a nonattainment area if they meet certain statutory criteria, 
including that the area met the air quality standard in question in the 
year leading up to the applicable attainment date.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 89 FR 55901, 55909.
    \27\ CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CCAC also expressed concern that PM2.5 concentrations in 
the Valley have not improved in recent years, and that this pattern 
should weigh against the extension of the attainment date. The EPA must 
assess whether to grant the attainment date extension in light of the 
statutory criteria. We note that CCAC relies on design values \28\ to 
evaluate the pace of improvement in the area. However, design values, 
which reflect the annual average over a three-year period, are not the 
metric that EPA uses to determine whether a state qualifies for a one-
year attainment date extension. Rather, pursuant to section 
172(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the EPA looks to the monitor data in the year 
leading up to the attainment date (i.e., in this case, calendar year 
2023) to assess an area's recent progress. As discussed in the proposal 
to grant the one-year extension of the attainment date, the EPA 
reviewed 2023 annual mean concentrations at each of the regulatory 
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley and determined that such 
data indicate that PM2.5 concentrations were below the 15.0 
[micro]g/m\3\ level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ For information about how the EPA calculates design values, 
see 40 CFR 50.7 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, section 4.1(b).
    \29\ 89 FR 55901, 55909.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, 2023 annual mean concentrations were lower than annual 
mean concentrations in 2021 and 2022, indicating an improvement in air 
quality conditions in 2023 relative to previous years.\30\ This is true 
even without considering potential impacts from any exceptional events 
during that timeframe.\31\ \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP480, accessed May 17, 2024 
(User ID: STSAI, Report Request ID: 2193813).
    \31\ Exceptional Events are unusual or naturally occurring 
events that can affect air quality but are not reasonably 
controllable using techniques that tribal, state or local air 
agencies may implement in order to attain and maintain the NAAQS. 
Exceptional events may include wildfires, high wind dust events, 
prescribed fires, stratospheric ozone intrusions, and volcanic and 
seismic activities.
    \32\ In the May 14, 2024, letter submitting documentation to 
support the State's request for an attainment date extension, the 
District noted that they and CARB ``are evaluating potential 
documentation to remove exceptional events (including wildfire 
impacts) from the 2021-2023 period, as allowed under the CAA and EPA 
policies.'' Letter dated May 14, 2024, from Samir Sheikh, Executive 
Director/APCO, SJVUAPCD, to Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, 
CARB, Subject: ``RE: Attainment Date Extension for the 1997 Annual 
PM2.5 Standard for the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment 
Area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA notes that while this final action extends the attainment 
date for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS to December 31, 2024, the area will remain classified as Serious 
nonattainment for those NAAQS and is not relieved of any planning 
obligations under the CAA. Following the December 31, 2024 attainment 
date, the State and the EPA will assess whether the area has attained 
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If the area has met the NAAQS, 
the EPA will make a determination that the area attained by the 
attainment date. If the area has not met the NAAQS, the State may 
request a second one-year extension if the area meets the CAA 
requirements for such an extension. If the State does not qualify for, 
or the EPA denies a request for, a second one-year extension under CAA 
section 172, then the EPA will issue a finding of failure to attain and 
the State will become subject to additional CAA requirements to achieve 
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin 
Valley area.
    Comment 2.A: CCAC asserts that the EPA does not have authority to 
grant a one-year extension of the attainment date for the San Joaquin 
Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C). Specifically, CCAC notes that subpart 4 of Part D of 
Title I of the Act provides for attainment date extensions for 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas under specific circumstances under 
section 188, and thus section 188 controls the question of whether the 
EPA can grant an attainment date extension for a Serious 
PM2.5 nonattainment area that fails to attain by the 
applicable attainment date. CCAC asserts that attainment date 
extensions for Serious nonattainment areas are addressed by CAA section 
188(e), that California did not request such an extension, and that 
therefore such extension is not available at this time to the San 
Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Response 2.A: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that the 
attainment date extension provisions under CAA section 188 control the 
present action.
    As CCAC accurately explains, the EPA reclassified the San Joaquin 
Valley as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS effective May 7, 2015.\33\ The following year, the EPA found that 
the San Joaquin Valley failed to attain by the applicable Serious 
attainment date and that sections 179(d) and 189(d) of the CAA governed 
all subsequent plan requirements and attainment deadlines.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015).
    \34\ 81 FR 84481 (November 23, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Crucially, following a finding of failure to attain for a Serious 
PM2.5 nonattainment area, CAA section 189(d) does not 
provide for a specific attainment date, and it instead requires:

    [T]he State in which such area is located shall, after notice 
and opportunity for public comment, submit within 12 months after 
the applicable attainment date, plan revisions which provide for 
attainment of the [PM2.5] air quality standard and, from 
the date of such submission until attainment for an annual reduction 
in [PM2.5] or [PM2.5] precursor emissions 
within the area of not less than 5 percent of the amount of such 
emissions as reported in the most recent inventory prepared for such 
area.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ CAA section 189(d).

    With respect to the new applicable attainment date for an area 
governed by CAA section 189(d), the EPA explained in the 
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule \36\ that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).

    [T]he final rule includes the overarching requirement for a 
Serious area that failed to attain by the previous attainment date 
to establish a new date for attaining the standard as expeditiously 
as practicable. However, neither CAA section 189(d) nor other 
sections in subpart 4 explicitly establish or provide the authority 
to establish a new attainment date for the area. Therefore, once an 
area is beyond the attainment dates that Congress specified in 
subpart 4 for the

[[Page 91266]]

PM10 NAAQS, the EPA must look to other provisions of part 
D of the CAA to provide authority for a new attainment date. 
Sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2) of the CAA provide generally 
applicable attainment dates that fill the gap in the statute left 
for areas subject to the requirements of CAA section 189(d). Thus, 
for a PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to CAA section 
189(d) requirements, the EPA must establish a new attainment date 
according to the provisions of CAA section 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2). 
The EPA has followed this same approach in the past for 
PM10 nonattainment areas governed by subpart 4 
nonattainment requirements.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Id. at 58106.

    Thus, subpart 4 controls the requirements for an attainment plan 
under CAA section 189(d); however, after a Serious PM2.5 
nonattainment area fails to attain by the attainment date, the 
applicable attainment date for a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment 
area subject to the requirements of CAA section 189(d) is controlled by 
the generally applicable provisions in subpart 1 of part D, CAA section 
172.
    Contrary to the commenter's assertion, section 172 explicitly 
provides for the extension that the EPA is finalizing as part of this 
action. The commenter cites CAA section 172(a)(2)(D), which states, 
``[t]his paragraph shall not apply with respect to nonattainment areas 
for which attainment dates are specifically provided under other 
provisions of this part.'' But as explained above, the attainment date 
for an attainment plan required under CAA section 189(d) is not 
specifically provided under the provisions in subpart 4, which is why 
the EPA relied on section 172 in setting the December 31, 2023 
attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 81 FR 84481, 84482.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because CAA section 172 controls for purposes of setting an 
attainment date for a plan required under CAA section 189(d), it is 
logical and reasonable that the generally applicable provisions in 
section 172 would control an extension of that attainment date in the 
absence of any specific authority in subpart 4 for such extensions.
    Comment 2.B: CCAC claims that the EPA evaluates the State's request 
for an attainment date extension pursuant to EPA guidance on the 
implementation of CAA section 188(d), which concerns attainment date 
extensions for Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas, and 
asserts that the EPA does not have authority to apply such provisions 
to a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area.
    Response 2.B: The EPA is not granting the extension pursuant to 
section 188(d) of the Act. Rather, because section 172(a)(2)(C) does 
not have PM-specific provisions and because the EPA has not issued 
guidance on how to implement the provisions of section 172(a)(2)(C) 
relevant to this particular question of the criteria for an extension 
of the attainment date for an PM2.5 nonattainment area 
subject to section 189(d), the EPA looked to guidance on the extension 
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas under CAA section 
188(d) in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, given that 
``section 188(d) is nearly identical to CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).'' 
\39\ While we did not assert that 188(d) controls in this situation, we 
did ``consider[ ] the guidance pertaining to the one-year extension 
requirements under CAA section 188(d) to persuasively inform the 
requirements for a one-year extension for a particulate matter 
nonattainment area under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 89 FR 55901, 55904.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 2.C: CCAC further claims that ``[t]he D.C. Circuit has 
rejected EPA's attempt to implement the PM2.5 standard under 
Subpart 1.''
    Response 2.C: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that reliance on 
the generally applicable provisions in CAA section 172 to fill a gap in 
subpart 4 indicates that the EPA is improperly implementing a 
PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 1. To the contrary, the EPA 
implements the PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the relevant 
provisions of both subpart 1 and subpart 4, and subpart 1 provisions 
continue to apply unless specifically overridden or revised by subpart 
4. As we stated in our proposal, the EPA does not dispute that section 
189(d) is the controlling provision for Serious areas that, like the 
San Joaquin Valley, fail to attain a PM2.5 NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date.\41\ Instead, the EPA is implementing the 
PM2.5 standard under subpart 4 and subpart 1, in keeping 
with EPA's longstanding interpretation that the statutory provisions of 
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179(d)(3) govern the attainment date for new 
plans required under CAA section 189(d) for areas that previously 
failed to attain by the Serious area attainment date.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ ``Following a January 4, 2013 decision of the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit . . . the EPA acknowledged that states 
must meet both subpart 1 and subpart 4 requirements in nonattainment 
plan SIP submissions for the 1997 24-hour and annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS.'' Id. at 55903.
    \42\ See, e.g., 72 FR 31183 (June 6, 2007) (finding that the 
Phoenix PM10 Serious nonattainment area failed to attain 
the standard by the December 31, 2006 attainment deadline and 
implementing the new attainment date for an attainment plan under 
CAA section 189(d) pursuant to sections 172 and 179).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 2.D: CCAC asserts that the PM2.5 SIP 
Requirements Rule and the EPA's implementing regulations under 40 CFR 
51.1005(c) prohibit California from requesting an extension of the 
December 31, 2023 applicable attainment deadline, and thus EPA approval 
of this one-year extension request would violate the EPA's own 
implementing regulations and is arbitrary and capricious.
    Response 2.D: The EPA disagrees that 40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibits 
the proposed attainment date extension. The EPA's regulations under 40 
CFR 51.1005 concern extensions of the applicable attainment date for 
Moderate and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Applicable 
attainment dates for PM2.5 nonattainment areas are initially 
set under 40 CFR 51.1004, and 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(1) and (a)(2) follow 
the mandates in CAA sections 188(c)(1) and (c)(2), the CAA sections 
governing the setting of Moderate and Serious attainment dates, 
respectively. Likewise, 40 CFR 51.1005(a) and (b) follow the 
requirements of CAA sections 188(d) and (e), respectively, as the 
primary sections governing extensions of the applicable attainment date 
for Moderate and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
    In contrast, the authority for the requirements in 40 CFR 
51.1004(a)(3) governing nonattainment areas subject to CAA section 
189(d) for failure to attain by the applicable Serious area attainment 
date comes from CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), not section 188. As explained 
in Response 2.A, CAA section 172 controls for purposes of setting an 
attainment date for a plan required under CAA section 189(d) because 
the provisions of subpart 4, including section 188(c), do not 
specifically provide authority for establishing attainment dates for 
189(d) attainment plans. Because a state required to adopt and submit a 
189(d) plan is subject to the attainment date requirements of CAA 
section 172(a)(2),\43\ 40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibits a state subject to 
section 189(d) from applying for an extension of the applicable 
attainment date in excess of that which is permitted for an attainment 
plan under section 189(d). For example, a Serious PM2.5 
nonattainment area subject to section 189(d) may not apply for an 
extension of the applicable attainment date under section 188(e). Thus, 
the EPA believes

[[Page 91267]]

the proposed attainment date extension, which was made in accordance 
with CAA sections 189(d) and 172, is consistent with the relevant CAA 
provisions and the EPA's implementing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ I.e., the nonattainment area must attain the relevant 
standard as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years 
from date of designation, with the possibility of setting the date 
10 years from the date of designation under certain circumstances, 
and with the possibility of additional extensions of two one-year 
periods under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 3: CCAC comments that ``[i]nstead of proposing to approve 
an illegal and unauthorized one-year extension, EPA should have made an 
attainment finding.'' CCAC asserts that the EPA has a duty to make an 
attainment finding within six months of the attainment date, citing CAA 
sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) and that the EPA instead proposes to 
extend the attainment date without authority to do so.
    Response 3: As explained in Responses 1 and 2, we believe a one-
year extension is appropriate in this situation and authorized by the 
CAA if a state meets the statutory preconditions. In our proposal, the 
EPA proposed to determine that the State has satisfied the criteria for 
a one-year extension under CAA section 172 for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley area, and if finalized 
the EPA would no longer be required under CAA section 179(c) to make a 
finding as to whether the area attained by the December 31, 2023 
attainment date. The EPA notes that it will again have an obligation 
under CAA section 179 to make a determination as to whether the San 
Joaquin Valley attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
following the extended December 31, 2024 attainment date. If the air 
quality data indicate that the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area 
did not attain by the December 31, 2024 attainment date, and if the 
State does not qualify for, or the EPA denies a request for, a second 
one-year extension under CAA section 172, then the EPA will issue a 
finding of failure to attain at such time in accordance with CAA 
section 179(c).

B. Comments From Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe

    Comment 4: Santa Rosa Rancheria notes that the San Joaquin Valley 
has not attained the standard in nearly three decades and opposes an 
extension due to the commenter's concerns that the SIP is not proving 
effective in bringing the area into attainment.
    Response 4: As discussed in Response 1, the EPA is evaluating the 
requested extension of the attainment date in light of the relevant 
statutory criteria. With respect to the air quality criterion of CAA 
section 172(a)(2)(C)(ii), the EPA has determined that the 2023 annual 
mean PM2.5 concentration data from each of the regulatory 
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that 
PM2.5 concentrations were below the 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ level 
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, reflecting an improvement in 
air quality relative to prior years. Based in part on our review of 
these data, we have determined that the State has met the requirements 
under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) for a one-year extension of the 
attainment date. The EPA will continue to monitor the area's progress 
towards attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and will 
make a finding as to whether the area attained the NAAQS following the 
applicable extended attainment date.
    Comment 5: Santa Rosa Rancheria expresses concern that elevated 
PM2.5 levels are correlated with premature mortality rates, 
aggravated respiratory and cardiovascular disease, changes in lung 
function, and increased respiratory and cardiovascular symptoms.
    Response 5: The EPA agrees that epidemiological studies have shown 
statistically significant correlations between elevated 
PM2.5 levels and adverse health outcomes, including 
premature mortality. While this action to approve a SIP revision and 
grant a one-year extension of the attainment date is not expected to 
reduce PM2.5 levels in the San Joaquin Valley, the EPA notes 
that the area is also designated nonattainment for the more stringent 
2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is subject to additional 
requirements to meet those NAAQS. As a result, the State will be 
continuing its efforts to adopt and implement additional control 
measures that will continue to improve ambient PM2.5 levels 
in the San Joaquin Valley. On August 22, 2024, California submitted a 
revised attainment plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, 
which includes, among other things, the State's control strategy to 
achieve reductions in direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 
precursors to bring the area into attainment of those NAAQS.\44\ While 
the EPA has not yet taken action on the revised plan for the 2012 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, we expect that implementation of the 
plan will yield additional reductions in PM2.5 
concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, 
EPA Region 9, with enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 
2024, and supplement submitted electronically October 7, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 6: The Santa Rosa Rancheria notes that it monitors its own 
air quality, and based on the data it has collected, Santa Rosa 
Rancheria challenges the representativeness of the data relied upon by 
the State and the EPA. Santa Rosa Rancheria states that ``[a]ccording 
to the Tribe's Air Quality Monitoring Program, from multiple locations 
around the Rancheria, as seen in the attachment, the PM2.5 
averages well above 25 [micro]g/m\3\. This data is reported on the AQS 
database. Exposure levels over 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ are considered 
unsafe. The Tribe's data shows the level consistently double that 
level.''
    Response 6: As discussed in our proposal, the EPA relies on 
complete, quality-assured data gathered at established State and Local 
Air Monitoring Stations in a nonattainment area and entered into the 
EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database to determine if an area meets the 
requirement under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) that the area had clean data 
for the relevant standard in the calendar year preceding the applicable 
attainment date.\45\ In evaluating Santa Rosa Rancheria's comments, the 
EPA has reviewed data collected by the Tribe that is available in AQS. 
These data indicate that Santa Rosa Rancheria reports data from one 
monitoring site (AQS ID: 06-031-0500) that measures ozone, 
PM10, and several meteorological parameters.\46\ 
PM2.5 data from this site are not available in AQS.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 89 FR 55901, 55907.
    \46\ EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP435, accessed August 20, 
2024 (User ID: XLEBARRY, Report Request ID: 2217065).
    \47\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Santa Rosa Rancheria's comment letter notes an attachment that 
appeared to be inadvertently omitted from the comment submission. The 
EPA followed up with Santa Rosa Rancheria regarding the data referenced 
in its letter, and in response, Santa Rosa Rancheria provided data 
files to the EPA that include PM2.5 data collected by 
monitors on tribal land in 2021 and 2022.\48\ We appreciate the Tribe 
sharing PM2.5 data from its monitoring network with the EPA. 
However, because these data are not complete, quality-assured data 
collected at regulatory monitoring sites that meet EPA requirements 
\49\ and report to the EPA's AQS database, these data are not eligible 
for comparison to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, 
these data collected in 2021-2022 were collected outside the timeframe 
relevant for the attainment date extension (i.e., 2023). While not 
directly relevant to this particular action, the EPA recognizes the

[[Page 91268]]

importance of these supplemental data and commends the Tribe for its 
collection and use of these data to help identify sources and inform 
real-time decision-making to minimize PM2.5 exposures in the 
community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Email dated September 4, 2024, from George Bernard, 
Environmental Director, Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, to 
Lily Lee, Assistant Director, Air & Radiation Division, EPA Region 
IX, with 84 attachments.
    \49\ Regulatory monitoring requires adherence to 40 CFR parts 
50, 53, and 58 and the related appendices and the use of designated 
federal reference or federal equivalent methods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 7: The Tribe asserts that research has shown that there is 
a strong correlation between farming and animal husbandry and elevated 
levels of ambient PM2.5. The Tribe states that a majority of 
the land in the San Joaquin Valley is used for agriculture and that 
because the Tribe is surrounded by agriculture, the air quality on 
Tribal land is more representative of the nonattainment area than data 
collected in more urban areas.
    Response 7: As discussed in Response 6, the PM2.5 
monitoring data collected by Santa Rosa Rancheria does not meet the 
EPA's regulatory requirements for comparison with the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS and were collected outside the timeframe 
relevant for this action. Therefore, these data are not directly 
relevant to the EPA's evaluation of whether the State has met the 
requirements for a one-year extension of the attainment date for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Regarding the correlation between farming and animal husbandry and 
elevated levels of PM2.5, we note that CARB and the District 
are engaged in several research efforts to better understand the 
emissions from these source categories. For example, in spring of 2024, 
CARB convened a subject matter expert review panel to evaluate existing 
data and science on NOX and ammonia emissions from soils in 
California.\50\ CARB has also been engaged in compiling California-
specific dairy activity data and related emissions trends.\51\ While 
not directly relevant to this action, we anticipate that such research 
studies will help inform continued efforts to reduce PM2.5 
exposures from agricultural activities for residents in the San Joaquin 
Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ For more information, see https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/eiareasource/1.%2023RD017%20Public%20Kickoff%20CARB%20Intro.pdf.
    \51\ For more information, see https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/CARB_Dairy_Sector_Workshop_Staff_Presentation_08-22-2024.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Environmental Justice Considerations

    As described in detail in our proposals, the EPA reviewed 
environmental and demographic data for the San Joaquin Valley using the 
EPA's EJ screening and mapping tool (``EJSCREEN'') \52\ \53\ and 
compared the data to the corresponding data for the United States as a 
whole. The results of the analysis are provided for informational and 
transparency purposes and are not a basis for the EPA's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ EJSCREEN provides a nationally consistent dataset and 
approach for combining environmental and demographic indicators. 
EJSCREEN is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen/what-ejscreen. 
The EPA used EJSCREEN to obtain environmental and demographic 
indicators representing each of the eight counties in the San 
Joaquin Valley.
    \53\ EPA Region IX, ``EJSCREEN Analysis for the Eight Counties 
of the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area,'' August 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    For the reasons discussed in our proposed rules and herein, the EPA 
is finalizing our approval of the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments as a 
revision to the California SIP. In doing so, we are approving the 
State's amendment to the Valley Incentive Measure for the purposes of 
emissions reductions in 2023 and the State's revision to the aggregate 
tonnage commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision to reflect that 
it has been satisfied by the Valley Incentive Measure. We are also 
approving the State's demonstration that the Valley Incentive Measure 
has achieved emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX and 0.27 
tpd of direct PM2.5 in the year 2023 and crediting those 
reductions toward the emissions reduction commitment in the California 
SIP.
    Additionally, in response to a request from the State of California 
on May 23, 2024, the EPA is granting a one-year extension to the 
applicable attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. This final action to 
extend the applicable attainment date from December 31, 2023, to 
December 31, 2024, for this nonattainment area is based on the State's 
compliance with the requirements in the applicable SIP for the area and 
on the 2023 PM2.5 monitoring data from sites in the San 
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this 
final action merely approves a state plan as meeting federal 
requirements and grants a state request for an attainment date 
extension consistent with federal requirements and does not impose 
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that 
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 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 approves 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 CAA.
    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 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, 
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. 
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to 
Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) builds on 
and supplements E.O. 12898 and defines EJ as, among other things, ``the 
just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of 
income, race, color, national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or 
disability in agency

[[Page 91269]]

decision-making and other Federal activities that affect human health 
and the environment.''
    The State did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its SIP 
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither 
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. Consistent with the EPA's 
discretion under the CAA, the EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is 
described above in the section titled, ``Environmental Justice 
Considerations.'' The analysis was done for the purpose of providing 
additional context and information about this rulemaking to the public, 
not as a basis of the action. Due to the nature of the action being 
taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral impact on the air 
quality of the affected area. In addition, there is no information in 
the record upon which this decision is based inconsistent with the 
stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving EJ for communities with EJ 
concerns.
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA 
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the 
CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 
21, 2025. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of 
this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the 
purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a 
petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the 
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged 
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 
307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 2, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding and reserving paragraphs 
(c)(620) through (622), and adding paragraph (c)(623) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (620)-(622) [Reserved]
    (623) The following plan revisions were submitted electronically on 
August 22, 2024, by the Governor's designee as an attachment to a 
letter of the same date.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials. (A) California Air Resources Board.
    (1) Selected portions titled ``Amendments to the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ 
SIP Revision and Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure for the 1997 
PM2.5 Standard,'' and ``Appendix B: 2022 Annual 
Demonstration Report: San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Equipment 
Incentive Measure Covering Projects Completed Through 12/31/2022,'' of 
the Staff Report, ``Review of the San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 
2012 12 [micro]g/m\3\ Annual PM2.5 Standard and Amendments 
to the Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure and the 1997 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ State Implementation Plan Revision,'' adopted July 25, 
2024.
    (2) The portion of CARB Resolution 24-10, dated July 25, 2024, 
adopting amendments to the Valley Incentive Measure to include 
quantification of emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX and 
0.27 tpd of PM2.5 in the year 2023 from existing 
agricultural equipment projects and substituting the reductions from 
the Valley Incentive Measure to meet the aggregate emissions reduction 
commitment in the attainment plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS approved in 40 CFR 52.220(c)(537)(ii)(A)(9).
    (B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-25946 Filed 11-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.