18528 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

1See proposed rule at 80 FR 1482 (January 12, 

2015) for a more detailed discussion of the 

background for this action, including the history of 

the PM2.5 NAAQS established in 1997, health 

effects and sources of PM2.5, designation of the SJV 

as nonattainment for the PM2.5 standards, and EPA’s 

actions on the submittals from the state of 

California to address the nonattainment area 

planning requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in the SJV. 

2Section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general 

expression of delegated rulemaking authority. See 

‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 

1992) (hereafter ‘‘General Preamble’’) at 13537, n. 

15. Although subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 

188(b)(1) mandate that EPA reclassify by specified 

timeframes any areas that it determines appropriate 

for reclassification by those dates, these 

subparagraphs do not restrict the general authority 

but simply specify that, at a minimum, EPA’s 

authority must be exercised at certain times. See id. 

EPA-APPROVED IDAHO REGULATIONS AND STATUTES

State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA Approval date Explanations 

Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) 58.01.01—Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho 

*******

107 ............................. Incorporations by Reference.3/20/2014, 3/30/2007, 

7/1/1997, ....................

5/1/1994 .....................

4/7/2015 [Insert Federal Register citation].Except Section 107.03(f) through (p), and 

with respect to 107.03(c), its incorporation 

by reference of 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) 

and (k)(2). 

*******

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.683 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 52.683 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

(a) The State of Idaho Rules for 

Control of Air Pollution in Idaho, 

specifically, IDAPA 58.01.01.005 

through 007 (definitions), IDAPA 

58.01.01.107.03(a), (b), (c) 

(incorporations by reference)(except, 

with respect to Section 107.03(c), its 

incorporation by reference of 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) and (k)(2)), IDAPA 

58.01.01.200 through 222 (permit to 

construct rules); IDAPA 58.01.01.510 

through 516 (stack height rules); and 

IDAPA 58.01.01.575 through 581 

(standards, increments and area 

designations) (except Section 577), are 

approved as meeting the requirements 

of title I, part C, subpart 1 of the Clean 

Air Act for preventing significant 

deterioration of air quality. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–07821 Filed 4–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0813; FRL–9925–30– 

Region 9] 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; California; San 

Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as 

Serious Nonattainment for the 1997 

PM2.5 Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

reclassify the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) 

Moderate nonattainment area, including 

areas of Indian country within it, as a 

Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 

PM2.5 national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) based on EPA’s 

determination that the area cannot 

practicably attain these NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2015 and in response to a request from 

the SJV Air Pollution Control District 

that we reclassify the area. As a 

consequence of this reclassification, 

California must submit a Serious area 

plan including a demonstration that the 

plan provides for attainment of the 1997 

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards in 

the SJV area by the applicable 

attainment date, which is no later than 

December 31, 2015, or by the most 

expeditious alternative date practicable, 

in accordance with the requirements of 

part D of title I of the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 7, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: The index to the docket 

(docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2014– 

0813) for this action is available 

electronically on the 

www.regulations.gov Web site and in 

hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California, 94105. While all documents 

in the docket are listed in the index, 

some information may be publicly 

available for viewing only at the hard 

copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, voluminous records, large 

maps), and some may not be publicly 

available at either location (e.g., CBI). To 

inspect the docket materials in person, 

please schedule an appointment during 

normal business hours with the contact 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Lee, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, (415) 972–3958, lee.anita@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. Final Action 

A. Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Applicable 

Attainment Dates 

B. Reclassification of Areas of Indian 

Country 

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On January 12, 2015 (80 FR 1482), 

EPA proposed to reclassify the SJV 

nonattainment area, including areas of 

Indian country within it, from Moderate 

nonattainment to Serious nonattainment 

for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5

standards based on EPA’s determination 

that the area cannot practicably attain 

these NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date of April 5, 2015.1 Under 

section 188(b)(1) of the CAA, prior to an 

area’s attainment date, EPA has 

discretionary authority to reclassify as a 

Serious nonattainment area ‘‘any area 

that the Administrator determines 

cannot practicably attain’’ the PM2.5

NAAQS by the applicable Moderate area 

attainment date.2 On September 25, 

2014, the District requested that EPA 

reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as 

Serious nonattainment for the 1997 

PM2.5 standards. This request included 

a demonstration that the SJV area 

cannot practicably attain the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard by the April 5, 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 18529 

3See letter titled ‘‘Sadredin Memo’’ in the docket 

for this rulemaking at EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0813– 

0002. 

4See 80 FR 1482 at 1488 (January 12, 2015). 

5 Id. at 1489. 

6See letter dated February 11, 2015, from Seyed 

Sadredin, Executive Director/Air Pollution Control 

Officer of the SJVAPCD, to Anita Lee, EPA Region 

9, ‘‘Re: Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0813: 

Comments on Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; California; San Joaquin Valley; 

Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 Standards. Proposed Rule (80 FR 7, pp. 

1482–1491, January 12, 2015).’’ 

7See generally subpart 4 of part D, title I of the 

CAA (‘‘Additional Provisions for Particulate Matter 

Nonattainment Areas’’); the General Preamble, 57 

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); and the Addendum, 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994); see also Natural 

Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 706 

F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (ruling that the CAA 

requires implementation of the PM2.5 standards 

under subpart 4 because PM2.5 particles fall within 

the statutory definition of PM10). 

8For a discussion of EPA’s interpretation of the 

requirements of section 188(e), see ‘‘State 

Implementation Plans for Serious PM10

Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers 

for PM10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 

1994) (hereafter ‘‘Addendum’’) at 42002; 65 FR 

19964 (April 13, 2000) (proposed action on PM10

Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 66 FR 50252 

(October 2, 2001) (proposed action on PM10 Plan for 

Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 (July 25, 

2002) (final action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa 

County, Arizona); and Vigil v. EPA, 366 F.3d 1025, 

Continued 

2015 attainment date.3 EPA’s proposed 

reclassification of the SJV area was 

based upon our evaluation of ambient 

air quality data for the 2003–2014 

period indicating that it is not 

practicable for certain monitoring sites 

within the SJV area to show PM2.5

design values at or below the level of 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by April 5, 

2015. 

In our proposed rule, EPA identified 

the additional SIP revisions that 

California would, upon reclassification, 

have to submit to satisfy the statutory 

requirements that apply to Serious 

areas, including the requirements of 

subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.4

EPA explained that under section 

189(b)(2) of the Act, the State must 

submit the required provisions to 

implement best available control 

measures (BACM), including best 

available control technology (BACT), no 

later than 18 months after 

reclassification and must submit the 

required attainment demonstration no 

later than 4 years after reclassification. 

Given the December 31, 2015, Serious 

area attainment date applicable to this 

area under CAA section 188(c)(2), 

however, we noted that we expect the 

State to adopt and submit a Serious area 

plan for these NAAQS well before the 

statutory SIP submittal deadlines in 

CAA section 189(b)(2).5

With respect to the nonattainment 

new source review (NNSR) program 

revisions to establish appropriate 

‘‘major stationary source’’ thresholds for 

direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 

accordance with CAA section 189(b)(3), 

EPA proposed to require the State to 

submit these NNSR SIP revisions no 

later than 12 months after the effective 

date of final reclassification. EPA 

requested comment on this proposed 

12-month timeframe but also noted that 

if California intended to seek an 

extension of the Serious area attainment 

date, the State would need to submit a 

request that satisfies the requirements of 

CAA section 188(e), including the 

required NNSR SIP revisions, in time for 

EPA to approve such an extension prior 

to the December 31, 2015 Serious area 

attainment date. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA received one comment letter on 

our proposed action. The comment 

letter was submitted by the San Joaquin 

Valley Air Pollution Control District 

(‘‘SJVAPCD’’ or ‘‘District’’) on February 

11, 2015, prior to the close of the 

comment period on our proposal.6 We 

summarize the District’s comments and 

provide our responses below. 

Comment: The SJVAPCD expresses 

support for EPA’s proposed 12-month 

timeframe for California’s submission of 

the required NNSR SIP revisions but 

objects to EPA’s statement indicating 

that, to obtain an extension of the 

attainment date under CAA section 

188(e), the state must submit these 

NNSR revisions ‘‘in time for EPA to 

approve such an extension prior to the 

December 31, 2015 Serious area 

attainment date.’’ The District asserts 

that EPA ‘‘provides no valid 

justification for this requirement’’ and 

that section 188(e) of the Act contains 

‘‘no mention of NSR, either directly or 

by implication, that would lead one to 

believe that the updated NSR rule is 

required prior to approval of the 

attainment deadline extension.’’ The 

District contends that delays in EPA’s 

regulatory actions related to 

implementation of the 1997 PM2.5

standards justify a different schedule for 

this submission. 

In sum, the District asserts that EPA 

is asking the District to begin an 

expedited process to adopt a serious 

area NSR rule before the area is 

reclassified as a Serious area and 

without implementation rules or 

guidance. The SJVAPCD requests that 

EPA decide in the final rule to require 

the District to submit a revised NNSR 

rule within 12 months after EPA’s final 

reclassification action and also to decide 

that ‘‘such an NSR rule adoption 

deadline does not interfere with EPA’s 

ability to approve an attainment 

deadline extension under 188(e).’’ 

Response: As a preliminary matter, 

EPA notes that nothing in the CAA 

requires the Agency to promulgate any 

implementation rules or guidance with 

respect to implementation of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The statutory provisions 

of the 1990 CAA Amendments 

addressing implementation of the PM10

NAAQS and EPA guidance for 

implementation of the PM10 NAAQS 

dating back to 1992 and 1994 are still 

applicable and relevant to this action.7

Thus, the absence of revised 

implementation rules or additional 

guidance is not itself a basis for setting 

a particular schedule for a state to make 

a statutorily required SIP submission. 

Upon further consideration of this 

question, however, EPA has determined 

that the specific factual circumstances 

in this instance justify the 12 months 

sought by SJVAPCD for the submission 

of the NNSR revisions. Accordingly, we 

are finalizing our proposal to require 

that California adopt and submit NNSR 

SIP revisions to implement the subpart 

4 requirements for Serious PM2.5

nonattainment areas in the SJV area no 

later than 12 months after the effective 

date of this reclassification. In light of 

the unique circumstances in the SJV, as 

discussed below, we do not intend at 

this time to treat these NNSR SIP 

revisions as a precondition to a request 

for an extension of the Serious area 

attainment date under CAA section 

188(e). 

Under section 188(e) of the Act, a 

state may apply to EPA for a single 

extension of the Serious area attainment 

date by up to 5 years, which EPA may 

grant if the State satisfies certain 

conditions. Before EPA may extend the 

attainment date for a Serious area under 

section 188(e), the state must: (1) Apply 

for an extension of the attainment date 

beyond the statutory attainment date; (2) 

demonstrate that attainment by the 

statutory attainment date is 

impracticable; (3) have complied with 

all requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the 

implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to 

the satisfaction of the Administrator that 

the plan for the area includes the most 

stringent measures that are included in 

the implementation plan of any State or 

are achieved in practice in any State, 

and can feasibly be implemented in the 

area; and (5) submit a demonstration of 

attainment by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable.8 Section 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
18530 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

amended at 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) (remanding 

EPA action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, 

Arizona, but generally upholding EPA’s 

interpretation of CAA section 188(e)). 

9As explained in our proposed rule (see 80 FR 

1482 at 1483–1484), on January 4, 2013 the D.C. 

Circuit remanded EPA’s 2007 and 2008 rules to 

implement the PM2.5 NAAQS and directed EPA to 

repromulgate these rules pursuant to subpart 4 of 

part D, title I of the Act. On June 2, 2014, EPA 

promulgated a rule classifying all PM2.5

nonattainment areas as Moderate under subpart 4 

and establishing a deadline for states to submit SIPs 

necessary to satisfy the Moderate area requirements 

(see 79 FR 31566, June 2, 2014). By this time, just 

over 18 months remained before the Serious area 

attainment date applicable to the SJV area under 

CAA section 188(c)(2), which is December 31, 2015. 

See 80 FR 1482 at 1484, 1487 (January 12, 2015). 

10As explained in our proposed rule, a 12-month 

timeframe provides the State a reasonable amount 

of time to make these relatively straightforward 

NNSR SIP revisions while assuring that new or 

modified major stationary sources of PM2.5 in the 

SJV area will be subject to the applicable NNSR 

requirements as expeditiously as practicable. See 80 

FR 1482 at 1489. 

11See http://www.epa.gov/airquality/

particlepollution/actions.html. 

12See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992) and Addendum, 59 FR 

41998 (August 16, 1994). 

13See 70 FR 944 at 956, 957 (January 5, 2005). 

14 ‘‘Indian country’’ as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 

refers to: ‘‘(a) all land within the limits of any 

Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the 

United States Government, notwithstanding the 

issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way 

running through the reservation, (b) all dependent 

Indian communities within the borders of the 

United States whether within the original or 

subsequently acquired territory thereof, and 

whether within or without the limits of a state, and 

(c) all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which 

have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way 

running through the same.’’ 

15See 80 FR 1482 at 1488 (January 12, 2015). 

188(e) does not explicitly require the 

state to have a fully approved NNSR 

program that meets the Act’s Serious 

area requirements before it may qualify 

for an extension of the Serious area 

attainment date. 

As a result of today’s reclassification 

of the SJV as Serious nonattainment for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, California is 

required to submit NNSR SIP revisions 

consistent with the requirements of 

subpart 4, including revisions to 

establish appropriate ‘‘major stationary 

source’’ thresholds for direct PM2.5 and 

PM2.5 precursors in accordance with 

CAA section 189(b)(3). Given the timing 

of this reclassification, just months 

before the latest permissible Serious 

area attainment date (December 31, 

2015), and the unusually short 

timeframe for the State’s development 

and submission of a plan to provide for 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

this date,9 we find it reasonable to 

provide the State a small amount of 

additional time to adopt and submit the 

Serious area NNSR SIP revisions 

required under subpart 4. Accordingly, 

under these particular circumstances, 

we do not expect the State to submit the 

required NNSR SIP revisions 

simultaneously with the Serious area 

attainment plan or with a request for an 

extension of the Serious area attainment 

date under CAA section 188(e). Instead, 

this final action requires the state to 

submit the NNSR SIP revisions required 

under subpart 4 no later than 12 months 

after the effective date of the 

reclassification.10 The State will need to 

submit the Serious area attainment plan 

and the section 188(e) extension request 

before December 31, 2015 to satisfy the 

statutory requirements. 

EPA has recently issued a new 

proposed rulemaking to implement the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the 

requirements of subparts 1 and 4 of part 

D, title I of the Act.11 As part of this 

proposed rulemaking, the Agency is 

seeking comment on how to interpret 

the criteria in section 188(e) for granting 

state requests for an extension of a 

Serious area attainment date 

prospectively. Until the Agency 

finalizes that proposed rule, EPA 

encourages the State and District to 

review the statutory provisions of the 

CAA applicable to implementation of 

the PM10 NAAQS, and EPA’s prior 

guidance in the General Preamble and 

Addendum, as they develop the SIP 

revisions necessary to satisfy the 

Serious area requirements that now 

apply in the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment 

area.12 Until EPA finalizes any new 

implementation rule for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, the existing guidance in the 

General Preamble and Addendum 

provide the Agency’s recommendations 

for SIP submissions required for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

III. Final Action 

A. Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Applicable 

Attainment Date 

In accordance with section 188(b)(1) 

of the Act, EPA is taking final action to 

reclassify the SJV area from Moderate to 

Serious nonattainment for the 1997 

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards of 

15.0 and 65 mg/m3, respectively, based 

on EPA’s determination that the SJV 

area cannot practicably attain these 

standards by the applicable attainment 

date of April 5, 2015. 

Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the 

attainment date for a Serious area ‘‘shall 

be as expeditiously as practicable but no 

later than the end of the tenth calendar 

year beginning after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment. . . .’’ 

The SJV area was designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

standards effective April 5, 2005.13

Therefore, as a result of our 

reclassification of the SJV area as a 

Serious nonattainment area, the latest 

permissible attainment date under 

section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for purposes 

of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in this area, 

is December 31, 2015. 

B. Reclassification of Areas of Indian 

Country 14

Eight Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the San Joaquin 

Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area: The 

Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Cold Springs Rancheria 

of Mono Indians of California, the North 

Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Picayune Rancheria of 

Chukchansi Indians of California, the 

Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi 

Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain 

Rancheria of California, the Tejon 

Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian 

Tribe of the Tule River Reservation. 

We have considered the relevance of 

our final action to reclassify the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious for the 

1997 PM2.5 standards to each tribe 

located within the SJV area. As 

discussed in more detail in our 

proposed rule, we believe that the same 

facts and circumstances that support the 

reclassification for the non-Indian 

country lands also support 

reclassification for Indian country 

located within the SJV nonattainment 

area.15 In this final action, EPA is 

therefore exercising our authority under 

CAA section 188(b)(1) to reclassify areas 

of Indian country geographically located 

in the SJV nonattainment area. Section 

188(b)(1) broadly authorizes EPA to 

reclassify a nonattainment area— 

including any area of Indian country 

located within such area—that EPA 

determines cannot practicably attain the 

relevant standard by the applicable 

attainment date. 

The effect of reclassification would be 

to lower the applicable ‘‘major 

stationary source’’ emissions thresholds 

for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for 

purposes of the NNSR program and the 

Title V operating permit program (CAA 

sections 189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B)) thus 

subjecting more new or modified 

stationary sources to these 

requirements. The reclassification may 

also lower the de minimis threshold 

under the CAA’s General Conformity 

requirements (40 CFR part 93, subpart 

B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under the 

General Conformity requirements, 

Federal agencies bear the responsibility 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 18531 

16As discussed in more detail in our proposed 

rule, EPA sent letters to tribal officials inviting 

government-to-government consultation. All eight 

letters can be found in the docket for this proposed 

action. 

17See letter dated January 30, 2015 from Kathryn 

Montes Morgan, Tribal Chairwoman, Tejon Indian 

Tribe to Kerry Drake, Associate Director, EPA 

Region 9 Air Division. 

18See email dated February 19, 2015 from Maeve 

Clancy, EPA Region 9 Air Division, to Kathryn 

Montes Morgan, Tribal Chairwoman, Tejon Indian 

Tribe. 

19For any Serious area, the terms ‘‘major source’’ 

and ‘‘major stationary source’’ include any 

stationary source that emits or has the potential to 

emit at least 70 tons per year of PM10 (CAA section 

189(b)(3)). 20See 80 FR 1482 at 1489. 

of determining conformity of actions in 

nonattainment and maintenance areas 

that require Federal permits, approvals, 

or funding. Such permits, approvals or 

funding by Federal agencies for projects 

in these areas of Indian country may be 

more difficult to obtain because of the 

lower de minimis thresholds. 

Given the potential implications of 

the reclassification, EPA contacted tribal 

officials to invite government-togovernment consultation on this 

rulemaking effort.16 EPA did not receive 

comments on our proposed rule from 

any tribe. On February 17, 2015, after 

the close of the comment period on our 

proposal, EPA received a letter dated 

January 30, 2015, from the Tejon Tribe 

expressing interest in developing a 

better understanding of the 

reclassification and implications for air 

quality.17 EPA invited the Tejon Tribe to 

participate in a conference call during 

the week of February 23, 2015, to 

discuss the Tribe’s questions.18 We 

continue to invite Indian tribes in the 

SJV to contact EPA with any questions 

about the effects of this reclassification 

on tribal interests and air quality. We 

note that although eligible tribes may 

opt to seek EPA approval of relevant 

tribal programs under the CAA, none of 

the affected tribes will be required to 

submit an implementation plan to 

address this reclassification. 

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements 

As a consequence of our 

reclassification of the SJV area as a 

Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS, California is required to 

submit additional SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious areas, including the 

requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title 

I of the Act. 

The Serious area SIP elements that 

California must submit are as follows: 

1. Provisions to assure that the best 

available control measures (BACM), 

including best available control 

technology (BACT) for stationary 

sources, for the control of direct PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors shall be 

implemented no later than 4 years after 

the area is reclassified (CAA section 

189(b)(1)(B)); 

2. A demonstration (including air 

quality modeling) that the plan provides 

for attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than December 

31, 2015, or where the State is seeking 

an extension of the attainment date 

under section 188(e), a demonstration 

that attainment by December 31, 2015 is 

impracticable and that the plan provides 

for attainment by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable (CAA 

sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A)); 

3. Plan provisions that require 

reasonable further progress (RFP) (CAA 

section 172(c)(2)); 

4. Quantitative milestones which are 

to be achieved every 3 years until the 

area is redesignated attainment and 

which demonstrate RFP toward 

attainment by the applicable date (CAA 

section 189(c)); 

5. Provisions to assure that control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to 

major stationary sources of PM2.5

precursors, except where the State 

demonstrates to EPA’s satisfaction that 

such sources do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the standard in the area (CAA section 

189(e)); 

6. A comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 

the area (CAA section 172(c)(3)); 

7. Contingency measures to be 

implemented if the area fails to meet 

RFP or to attain by the applicable 

attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9)); 

and 

8. A revision to the NNSR program to 

establish appropriate ‘‘major stationary 

source’’ 19 thresholds for direct PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 

189(b)(3)). 

Section 189(b)(2) states, in relevant 

part, that the State must submit the 

required BACM provisions ‘‘no later 

than 18 months after reclassification of 

the area as a Serious Area’’ and must 

submit the required attainment 

demonstration ‘‘no later than 4 years 

after reclassification of the area to 

Serious.’’ Thus, the Act provides the 

State with up to 18 months after the 

effective date of this reclassification 

(i.e., until late 2016) to submit a BACM 

demonstration and up to 4 years after 

this date (i.e., until early 2019) to submit 

a Serious area attainment 

demonstration. Given the December 31, 

2015 Serious area attainment date for 

the 1997 PM2.5 standards in this area 

under CAA section 188(c)(2), however, 

EPA expects the State to adopt and 

submit a Serious area plan for the 1997 

PM2.5 standards well before the statutory 

SIP submittal deadlines in section 

189(b)(2). 

Additionally, in light of the available 

ambient air quality data and the short 

amount of time available before the 

December 31, 2015 attainment date 

under CAA section 188(c)(2), EPA 

anticipates that California may choose 

to submit a request for an extension of 

the Serious area attainment date 

pursuant to section 188(e) 

simultaneously with its submittal of a 

Serious area plan for the area. If 

California fails to submit a request for 

an extension of the Serious area 

attainment date that satisfies the 

requirements of section 188(e) and the 

SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM2.5

standards by December 31, 2015, under 

CAA section 189(d) the State would be 

required to submit, within 12 months 

after December 31, 2015, plan revisions 

which provide for attainment of the 

PM2.5 standards and, from the date of 

such submission until attainment, for an 

annual reduction in emissions within 

the SJV area of not less than 5 percent 

of the amount of such emissions as 

reported in the most recent inventory 

prepared for the area (hereafter ‘‘section 

189(d) plan’’). If, however, California 

submits and EPA approves a section 

188(e) request for an extension of the 

Serious area attainment date prior to the 

December 31, 2015 attainment date for 

the SJV area, the requirement to submit 

a section 189(d) plan would not apply 

unless and until the SJV area fails to 

attain the 1997 PM2.5 standards by the 

extended attainment date approved by 

EPA under section 188(e). 

Given the short amount of time 

available for California’s development of 

these SIP submittals, EPA anticipates 

that the Serious area attainment 

demonstration for the SJV area may rely 

to some extent on existing 

photochemical modeling analyses 

developed for previous PM2.5 plan 

submittals. EPA commits to work with 

the District and the State as they 

develop the necessary technical support 

for the Serious area plan and to provide 

guidance on the requirements that 

California must meet to qualify for an 

extension of the Serious area attainment 

date under CAA section 188(e). 

Finally, for the reasons provided in 

our proposed rule 20 and in our 

responses to comments above, we are 

finalizing our proposal to require the 

State to submit the NNSR SIP revisions 

required for Serious areas under subpart 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
18532 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

4 no later than 12 months after the 

effective date of this reclassification. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is exempt from review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) because it relates to a 

designation of an area for air quality 

purposes and will reclassify the SJV 

from its current air quality designation 

of Moderate nonattainment to Serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. This action does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities. The final rule requires the state 

to adopt and submit SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious areas, and would not 

itself directly regulate any small entities 

(see section III.C of this final rule). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate of $100 million or 

more and does not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538). This action itself imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local, or 

tribal governments, or the private sector. 

The final action reclassifies the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers existing 

statutory timeframes for the state to 

submit SIP revisions. Such a 

reclassification in and of itself does not 

impose any federal intergovernmental 

mandate. The final action does not 

require any tribes to submit 

implementation plans. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action may have tribal 

implications. However, it will neither 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on federally recognized tribal 

governments, nor preempt tribal law. 

Eight Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment 

area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big 

Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Cold Springs Rancheria 

of Mono Indians of California, the North 

Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Picayune Rancheria of 

Chukchansi Indians of California, the 

Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi 

Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain 

Rancheria of California, the Tejon 

Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian 

Tribe of the Tule River Reservation. We 

note that none of the tribes located in 

the SJV nonattainment area have 

requested eligibility to administer 

programs under the Clean Air Act. This 

final action affects EPA’s 

implementation of the new source 

review program because of the lower 

‘‘major stationary source’’ threshold 

triggered by reclassification (CAA 

189(b)(3)). The final action may also 

affect new or modified stationary 

sources proposed in these areas that 

require Federal permits, approvals, or 

funding. Such projects are subject to the 

requirements of EPA’s General 

Conformity rule, and Federal permits, 

approvals, or funding for the projects 

may be more difficult to obtain because 

of the lower de minimis thresholds 

triggered by reclassification. 

Given these potential implications, 

consistent with the EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, EPA contacted tribal 

officials early in the process of 

developing this regulation to permit 

them to have meaningful and timely 

input into its development. EPA invited 

tribal officials to consult during the 

development of the proposed rule and 

following signature of the proposed 

rule. As discussed in more detail in our 

proposed action, we sent letters to 

leaders of the tribes with areas of Indian 

country in the SJV nonattainment area 

inviting government-to-government 

consultation on the rulemaking effort. 

On February 17, 2015, EPA received a 

letter dated January 30, 2015 from the 

Tejon Tribe expressing an interest in 

developing a better understanding of, 

among other things, the effect of the 

reclassification on air quality. EPA 

invited the Tejon Tribe to participate in 

a conference call during the week of 

February 23, 2015, and EPA staff 

subsequently had preliminary 

conversations about this action with the 

Tribe but has not yet received 

confirmation of a request to schedule a 

conference call. No other Indian tribe 

has expressed an interest in discussing 

this action with EPA. We continue to 

invite Indian tribes in the SJV to contact 

EPA with any questions about the 

effects of this reclassification on tribal 

interests and air quality. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it reclassifies the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers additional 

Serious area planning requirements 

under the CAA. This action does not 

establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This final action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, because it is not 

a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This action is not subject to the 

requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) because it does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

EPA believes the human health or 

environmental risk addressed by this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or indigenous 

populations. This action reclassifies the 

SJV nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers additional 

Serious area planning requirements 

under the CAA. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 18533 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 

will be effective on May 7, 2015. 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by June 8, 2015. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Incorporation 

by reference, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference. 

Dated: March 27, 2015. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.245 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) as follows: 

§ 52.245 New Source Review rules. 

* * * * * 

(c) By May 7, 2016, the New Source 

Review rules for PM2.5 for the San 

Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control 

District must be revised and submitted 

as a SIP revision. The rules must satisfy 

the requirements of sections 189(b)(3) 

and 189(e) of the Clean Air Act. 

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS 

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

PURPOSES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. Section 81.305 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In the table titled ‘‘California—1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and 

secondary],’’ revise the entries under 

‘‘San Joaquin Valley, CA’’; and 

■ b. In the table titled ‘‘California—1997 

24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and 

secondary],’’ revise the entries under 

‘‘San Joaquin Valley, CA’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 81.305 California. 

* * * * * 

CALIFORNIA—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS 

[Primary and secondary] 

Designated Area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

*******

San Joaquin Valley, CA: 

Fresno County .......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Kern County (part) .................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

That portion of Kern County which lies west and north of a line described as follows: Beginning at the Kern-Los Angeles County 

boundary and running north and east along the northwest 

boundary of the Rancho La Libre Land Grant to the point of 

intersection with the range line common to R. 16 W. and R. 17 

W., San Bernardino Base and Meridian; north along the range 

line to the point of intersection with the Rancho El Tejon Land 

Grant boundary; then southeast, northeast, and northwest along 

the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant to the northwest corner of S. 3, T. 11 N., R. 17 W.; then west 1.2 miles; 

then north to the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant boundary; then 

northwest along the Rancho El Tejon line to the southeast corner of S. 34, T. 32 S., R. 30 E., Mount Diablo Base and Meridian; then north to the northwest corner of S. 35, T. 31 S., R. 30 

E.; then northeast along the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon 

Land Grant to the southwest corner of S. 18, T. 31 S., R. 31 E.; 

then east to the southeast corner of S. 13, T. 31 S., R. 31 E.; 

then north along the range line common to R. 31 E. and R. 32 

E., Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, to the northwest corner of 

S. 6, T. 29 S., R. 32 E.; then east to the southwest corner of S. 

31, T. 28 S., R. 32 E.; then north along the range line common 

to R. 31 E. and R. 32 E. to the northwest corner of S. 6, T. 28 

S., R. 32 E., then west to the southeast corner of S. 36, T. 27 

S., R. 31 E., then north along the range line common to R. 31 

E. and R. 32 E. to the Kern-Tulare County boundary.


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
18534 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

CALIFORNIA—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS—Continued 

[Primary and secondary] 

Designated Area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

Kings County ............................................................................................ Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Madera County ......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Merced County ......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

San Joaquin County ................................................................................. Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Stanislaus County .................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Tulare County ........................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

*******

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

2This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

CALIFORNIA—1997 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS 

[Primary and secondary] 

Designated Area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

*******

San Joaquin Valley, CA: 

Fresno County .......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Kern County (part) .................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

That portion of Kern County which lies west and north of a line described as follows: Beginning at the Kern-Los Angeles County 

boundary and running north and east along the northwest 

boundary of the Rancho La Libre Land Grant to the point of 

intersection with the range line common to R. 16 W. and R. 17 

W., San Bernardino Base and Meridian; north along the range 

line to the point of intersection with the Rancho El Tejon Land 

Grant boundary; then southeast, northeast, and northwest along 

the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant to the northwest corner of S. 3, T. 11 N., R. 17 W.; then west 1.2 miles; 

then north to the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant boundary; then 

northwest along the Rancho El Tejon line to the southeast corner of S. 34, T. 32 S., R. 30 E., Mount Diablo Base and Meridian; then north to the northwest corner of S. 35, T. 31 S., R. 30 

E.; then northeast along the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon 

Land Grant to the southwest corner of S. 18, T. 31 S., R. 31 E.; 

then east to the southeast corner of S. 13, T. 31 S., R. 31 E.; 

then north along the range line common to R. 31 E. and R. 32 

E., Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, to the northwest corner of 

S. 6, T. 29 S., R. 32 E.; then east to the southwest corner of S. 

31, T. 28 S., R. 32 E.; then north along the range line common 

to R. 31 E. and R. 32 E. to the northwest corner of S. 6, T. 28 

S., R. 32 E., then west to the southeast corner of S. 36, T. 27 

S., R. 31 E., then north along the range line common to R. 31 

E. and R. 32 E. to the Kern-Tulare County boundary.

Kings County ............................................................................................ Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Madera County ......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Merced County ......................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

San Joaquin County ................................................................................. Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Stanislaus County .................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

Tulare County ........................................................................................... Nonattainment May 7, 2015 .. Serious. 

*******

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

2This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 66 / Tuesday, April 7, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 18535 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–07765 Filed 4–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0918; FRL–9925–76– 

OAR] 

Additional Air Quality Designations 

and Technical Amendment To Correct 

Inadvertent Error in Air Quality 

Designations for the 2012 Primary 

Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is establishing air quality 

designations in the United States (U.S.) 

for the 2012 primary annual fine 

particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for five 

areas in Georgia and neighboring 

counties in Alabama and South 

Carolina. The EPA is also changing the 

initial designation of one area in Ohio, 

two areas in Pennsylvania, one area 

shared between Indiana and Kentucky, 

and one area shared between Kentucky 

and Ohio for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

These states have recently submitted 

complete, quality-assured, and certified 

air quality data for 2014, and based on 

that data the EPA is finalizing 

appropriate initial designations for these 

areas. Lastly, the EPA is making one 

minor technical amendment to correct 

an inadvertent error in the initial 

designation for a county in 

Pennsylvania with respect to the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

April 15, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0918. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, 

William Jefferson Clinton West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The 

Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744 and 

the telephone number for the Air Docket 

is (202) 566–1742. 

In addition, the EPA has established 

a Web site for these rulemakings at: 

http:/http://epa.gov/pmdesignations/

2012standards/index.htm. This Web 

site includes the EPA’s final PM2.5

designations, as well as state and tribal 

initial recommendation letters, the 

EPA’s modification letters, technical 

support documents, responses to 

comments and other related technical 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions concerning this 

action, please contact Andy Chang, U.S. 

EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Air Quality Planning 

Division, C539–04, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541– 

2416, email at chang.andy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

REGIONAL OFFICE CONTACTS: 

Region 3—Leslie Jones, (215) 814–3409, 

jones.leslie@epa.gov, 

Region 4—Joel Huey, (404) 562–9104, 

huey.joel@epa.gov, and 

Region 5—Carolyn Persoon, (312) 353– 

8290, persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

The public may inspect the rule and 

state-specific technical support 

information at the following locations: 

Regional offices States 

EPA Region 3: Office of Air Program Planning, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2187, (215) 814–2178.Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and 

West Virginia. 

EPA Region 4: Air Planning Branch, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 

61 Forsyth, Street, SW, 12th Floor, Atlanta, GA 30303–8960, (404) 

562–9127.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina and Tennessee. 

EPA Region 5: Air Programs Branch, Ralph Metcalfe Federal Building, 

77 West Jackson Street, Chicago, IL 60604–3590, (312) 886–6043.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. 

Table of Contents 

The following is an outline of the 

Preamble. 

I. Background 

II. Purpose and Designation Decisions Based 

on 2012–2014 Data 

A. Deferred Areas Designated 

Unclassifiable/Attainment Based on 

2012–2014 Data 

B. Nonattainment Designations Changing 

to Unclassifiable/Attainment or 

Unclassifiable Based on 2012–2014 Data 

C. Minor Technical Amendment To Correct 

Inadvertent Error 

III. Environmental Justice Considerations 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

L. Judicial Review 

I. Background 

On December 14, 2012, the EPA 

promulgated a revised primary annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased 

protection of public health and welfare 

from fine particle pollution (78 FR 3086; 

January 15, 2013). In that action, the 

EPA revised the primary annual PM2.5

standard, strengthening it from 15.0 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 

12.0 mg/m3, which is attained when the 

3-year average of the annual arithmetic 

means does not exceed 12.0 mg/m3. 

Section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7407(d), governs the 

process for initial area designations after 

the EPA establishes a new or revised 

NAAQS. Under section 107(d), each 

governor is required to, and each tribal 

leader may, if they so choose, 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES