75764 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2014–16–10, Amendment 39–17934 (79 

FR 48961, August 19, 2014), and adding 

the following new AD: 

Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2012– 

1327; Directorate Identifier 2012–NE– 

47–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by December 

16, 2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2014–16–10, 

Amendment 39–17934 (79 FR 48961, August 

19, 2014). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) 

RB211 Trent 768–60, 772–60, and 772B–60 

turbofan engines, with low-pressure (LP) 

compressor blade, part number (P/N) 

FK23411, FK25441, FK25968, FW11901, 

FW15393, FW23643, FW23741, FW23744, 

KH23403, or KH23404, installed. 

(d) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by LP compressor 

blade partial airfoil release events. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent LP compressor 

blade airfoil separations, damage to the 

engine, and damage to the airplane. 

(e) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(1) Ultrasonic Inspection (UI) of LP 

Compressor Blade 

(i) After the effective date of this AD, for 

LP compressor blades that have accumulated 

less than 1,800 cycles since new (CSN) or 

cycles since last inspection (CSLI), perform a 

UI of each LP compressor blade before the 

blade exceeds 2,400 CSN or CSLI. Repeat the 

UI of the blade before exceeding 2,400 CSLI. 

(ii) For any LP compressor blade that 

exceeds 1,800 CSN on the effective date of 

this AD, inspect the blade before exceeding 

600 flight cycles after the effective date of 

this AD or before exceeding 3,600 CSN, 

whichever occurs first. Thereafter, perform 

the repetitive inspections before exceeding 

2,400 CSLI. 

(iii) For any blade that exceeds 2,200 CSLI 

on September 23, 2014 (the effective date of 

AD 2014–16–10), inspect the blade before 

exceeding 3,000 CSLI or before further flight, 

whichever occurs later. Thereafter, perform 

the repetitive inspections before exceeding 

2,400 CSLI. 

(iv) Use paragraph 3, excluding 

subparagraphs 3.C.(2)(b), 3.D.(2) and 3.G, of 

RR Alert Non-Modification Service Bulletin 

(NMSB) RB.211–72–AH465, Revision 2, 

dated May 11, 2016, to perform the 

inspections required by this AD. 

(2) Use of Replacement Blades 

(i) After the effective date of this AD, LP 

compressor blade, P/N FK23411, FK25441, 

FK25968, FW11901, FW15393, FW23643, 

FW23741, FW23744, KH23403, or KH23404, 

that has accumulated at least 2,400 CSN or 

CSLI is eligible for installation if the blade 

has passed the UI required by this AD. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(f) Credit for Previous Actions 

You may take credit for the UI required by 

paragraph (e) of this AD, if you performed the 

UI before the effective date of this AD using 

RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–G702, dated May 

23, 2011; or RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–G872, 

Revision 2, dated March 8, 2013, or earlier 

revisions; or RR NMSB No. RB.211–72–H311, 

dated March 8, 2013; or the Engine Manual 

E-Trent-1RR, Task 72–31–11–200–806. 

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

The Manager, Engine Certification Office, 

may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make 

your request. You may email your request to: 

ANE–AD–AMOC@faa.gov. 

(h) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, 

Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238– 

7754; fax: 781–238–7199; email: 

robert.green@faa.gov. 

(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency AD 2016–0141, dated July 20, 

2016, for more information. You may 

examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating it in Docket No. 

FAA–2012–1327. 

(3) RR Alert NMSB RB.211–72–AH465, 

Revision 2, dated May 11, 2016, can be 

obtained from RR, using the contact 

information in paragraph (h)(4) of this AD. 

(4) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 

31, Derby DE24 8BJ, UK; phone: 44 0 1332 

242424; fax: 44 0 1332 249936. 

(5) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 26, 2016. 

Colleen M. D’Alessandro, 

Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–26334 Filed 10–31–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0244; FRL–9954–76– 

Region 9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

California; Coachella Valley; 

Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

California to provide for attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient 

air quality standards in the Coachella 

Valley nonattainment area. The EPA is 

proposing to find the emissions 

inventories to be acceptable and to 

approve the reasonably available control 

measures, transportation control 

strategies and measures, rate of progress 

and reasonable further progress 

demonstrations, attainment 

demonstration, vehicle miles traveled 

offset demonstration and the 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emission budgets. 

DATES: Any comments must be 

submitted by December 1, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0244 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75765 

1California plans use the term Reactive Organic 

Gases (ROG) for VOC. These terms are essentially 

synonymous. For simplicity, we use the term VOC 

herein to mean either VOC or ROG. 

2On March 27, 2008, the EPA revised and further 

strengthened the primary and secondary NAAQS 

for ozone by setting the acceptable level of ozone 

in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an 

8-hour period (‘‘2008 8-hour ozone standards’’). See 

73 FR 16436. On May 21, 2012, the EPA designated 

areas of the country with respect to the 2008 8-hour 

ozone standards. See 77 FR 30088 and 40 CFR 

81.330. On October 1, 2015, the EPA again 

strengthened the primary and secondary NAAQS 

for ozone in ambient air to 0.070 ppm averaged over 

8 hours. See 80 FR 65292. For nonattainment areas 

classified as ‘‘serious’’ under the 2008 ozone 

standards, such as the Coachella Valley, attainment 

SIPs were due on July 21, 2016. We will evaluate 

the 2008 attainment SIPs in the timeframes 

specified by the CAA. We have not yet set SIP 

submittal dates for the 2015 8-hour ozone 

standards. Today’s action applies only to the 1997 

8-hour ozone standards and does not address 

requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone 

standards. 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site and 

in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105. While all documents 

in the docket are listed in the index, 

some information may be publicly 

available only at the hard copy location 

(e.g., copyrighted material), and some 

may not be publicly available at either 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Kelly, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, (415) 972–3856, 

kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the 

Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area 

A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standards 

B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for 

Ozone Nonattainment SIPs 

III. CARB’s SIP Submittals to Address the 

1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in the 

Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area 

A. CARB’s SIP Submittals 

B. CAA Procedural and Administrative 

Requirements for SIP Submittals 

IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone 

Plan 

A. Emissions Inventories 

B. Reasonably Available Control Measures 

Demonstration and Adopted Control 

Strategy 

C. Attainment Demonstration 

D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further 

Progress Demonstrations 

E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 

Transportation Conformity 

F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions 

Offset Demonstration 

V. The EPA’s Proposed Actions 

A. The EPA’s Proposed Approvals 

B. Request for Public Comments 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the 

Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area 

A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standards 

Ground-level ozone is formed when 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) react in the 

presence of sunlight.1 These two 

pollutants, referred to as ozone 

precursors, are emitted by many types of 

pollution sources, including on- and offroad motor vehicles and engines, power 

plants and industrial facilities, and 

smaller area sources such as lawn and 

garden equipment and paints. 

Scientific evidence indicates that 

adverse public health effects occur 

following exposure to ozone, 

particularly in children and adults with 

lung disease. Breathing air containing 

ozone can reduce lung function and 

inflame airways, which can increase 

respiratory symptoms and aggravate 

asthma or other lung diseases. Ozone 

exposure also has been associated with 

increased susceptibility to respiratory 

infections, medication use, doctor visits, 

as well as emergency department visits 

and hospital admissions for individuals 

with lung disease. Ozone exposure also 

increases the risk of premature death 

from heart or lung disease. Children are 

at increased risk from exposure to ozone 

because their lungs are still developing 

and they are more likely to be active 

outdoors, which increases their 

exposure. See ‘‘Fact Sheet, Proposal to 

Revise the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards for Ozone’’ (January 

6, 2010); 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010). 

In 1979, under section 109 of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA 

established primary and secondary 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS or standards) for ozone at 0.12 

parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 

1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202 (February 

8, 1979). 

On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the 

primary and secondary standards for 

ozone to set the acceptable level of 

ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm, 

averaged over an 8-hour period (‘‘1997 

8-hour ozone standards’’). See 62 FR 

38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA set the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard based on 

scientific evidence demonstrating that 

ozone causes adverse health effects at 

lower concentrations and over longer 

periods of time than was understood 

when the previous 1-hour ozone 

standards were set. The EPA determined 

that the 1997 8-hour standards would be 

more protective of human health, 

especially for children and adults who 

are active outdoors, and individuals 

with a pre-existing respiratory disease, 

such as asthma.2 In 2008, the EPA 

revised and strengthened the NAAQS 

for ozone by setting the acceptable level 

of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 

ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period. 73 

FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). In 2015, the 

EPA further tightened the 8-hour ozone 

standards to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292 

(October 26, 2015). While the 1979 1- 

hour ozone standards and the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standards have been 

revoked, certain requirements that had 

applied under the revoked standards 

continue to apply under the antibacksliding provisions of CAA section 

172(e), including an approved 

attainment plan. 

B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by 

the CAA to designate areas throughout 

the nation as attaining or not attaining 

the standards. Effective June 15, 2004, 

we designated nonattainment areas for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. See 69 

FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). The 

designations and classifications for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standards for 

California areas are codified at 40 CFR 

81.305. In a rule governing certain facets 

of implementation of the 8-hour ozone 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75766 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

3 Design values for 2000 to 2006 are contained in 

Figure 8–5 of the 2007 AQMP. Design values for 

2005 to 2015 are contained in the Air Quality 

Subsystem (AQS) Preliminary Design Value Report 

for the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert 

(September 7, 2016). These documents are in the 

docket for today’s action. 

4For more information about ozone design 

values, see 40 CFR 50, Appendix I. 

5 ‘‘Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,’’ 

South Coast Air Quality Management District, June 

2007, see page 8–1. 

6 2007 AQMP at 8–4 (citing R.W. Keith 

(SCAQMD) A Climatological/Air Quality Profile, 

California South Coast Air Basin, 1980; E.K. Kauper 

(Pollution Res. & Control Corp.), Coachella Valley 

Air Quality Study, Final Report, (County Contract 

& U.S. Public Health Service Grant No. 69–A–0610), 

1971; P.J. Drivas and F.H. Shair, A Tracer Study of 

Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles Area, 

Atmos. Environ. 8: 1155–1163. 4, 1974; T.B. Smith 

et al. (ARB Contract to MRI/Caltech), ‘‘The Impact 

of Transport from the South Coast Air Basin on 

Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin,’’ 

1983). 

7 2007 AQMP at 8–4. 

8 2007 AQMP at 8–4, Table 8–2. 

9See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive 

Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 28, 2007 

with enclosures. 

10See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive 

Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 16, 2007 

with enclosures. 

standards (the Phase 1 Rule), the EPA 

classified the Coachella Valley as 

‘‘Serious’’ for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standards, with an attainment date no 

later than June 15, 2013. See 69 FR 

23858 (April 30, 2004). On November 

28, 2007, the California Air Resources 

Board (CARB or State) requested that 

the EPA reclassify the Coachella Valley 

8-hour ozone nonattainment area from 

‘‘Serious’’ to ‘‘Severe-15.’’ The EPA 

granted the reclassification, effective 

June 4, 2010, with an attainment date of 

not later than June 15, 2019. See 75 FR 

24409 (May 5, 2010). 

The Coachella Valley area is located 

within Riverside County. For a precise 

description of the geographic 

boundaries of the area, see 40 CFR 

81.305. The Coachella Valley is under 

the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District (SCAQMD 

or District). The District and CARB are 

responsible for adopting and submitting 

a state implementation plan (SIP) to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards 

for nonattainment areas in their 

jurisdiction. 

Air quality in the Coachella Valley 

has steadily improved in recent years. 

Design values have declined from 0.108 

ppm in 2003 to 0.088 ppm in 2015.3

Design values are used to designate and 

classify nonattainment areas, as well as 

to assess progress towards meeting the 

air quality standards.4

The Coachella Valley is downwind 

from the South Coast Air Basin, which 

is also regulated by the SCAQMD. The 

South Coast Air Basin’s continued 

progress toward meeting the 1997 

Ozone standards is critical to the 

Coachella Valley attaining the 1997 

ozone standards. The SCAQMD’s Final 

2007 Air Quality Management Plan 

(2007 AQMP) states, ‘‘pollutant 

transport from the South Coast Air 

Basin to the Coachella Valley is the 

primary cause of its ozone 

nonattainment status.’’ 5 The 2007 

AQMP cites several studies that confirm 

the transport between the two air 

basins.6 It also describes the late daily 

peak in ozone concentrations, 6:00 p.m. 

for Palm Springs, as indicative of 

pollution that has been transported. The 

2007 AQMP states, ‘‘if this peak [in 

ozone concentrations] were locally 

generated, it would be occurring near 

mid-day and not in the late afternoon or 

early evening.’’ 7 The 2007 AQMP also 

compares the relative magnitudes of 

VOC and NOX emissions in the 

Coachella Valley and the South Coast 

Air Basin, showing average annual VOC 

emissions to be 30–40 times greater in 

the South Coast Air Basin than in the 

Coachella Valley, and average annual 

NOX emissions to be more than 20 times 

greater in the South Coast Air Basin.8

II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements 

for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs 

States must implement the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standards under Title 1, Part 

D of the CAA, which includes section 

172, ‘‘Nonattainment plan provisions,’’ 

and subpart 2, ‘‘Additional Provisions 

for Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’ 

(sections 181–185). 

In order to assist states in developing 

effective plans to address ozone 

nonattainment problems, the EPA 

issued an implementation rule for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standards (‘‘1997 

Ozone Implementation Rule’’). This rule 

was finalized in two phases. The first 

phase of the rule addressed 

classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standards, applicable attainment dates 

for the various classifications, and the 

timing of emissions reductions needed 

for attainment. See 69 FR 23951 (April 

30, 2004). The second phase addressed 

SIP submittal dates and the 

requirements for reasonably available 

control technology and measures (RACT 

and RACM), reasonable further progress 

(RFP), modeling and attainment 

demonstrations, contingency measures, 

and new source review. See 70 FR 

71612 (November 29, 2005). The rule 

was codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart 

X. 

The EPA announced the revocation of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 

anti-backsliding requirements that apply 

upon revocation, in a rulemaking that 

established final implementation rules 

for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 80 

FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Consistent 

with the anti-backsliding provisions in 

CAA section 172(e), the EPA included 

anti-backsliding requirements that apply 

upon revocation of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Notwithstanding 

revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, areas that were designated as 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS at the time the standards 

were revoked continue to be subject to 

certain SIP requirements that had 

previously applied based on area 

classifications for the standards. Id. at 

12296; 40 CFR 51.1105 and 51.1100(o). 

Thus, in general, the Coachella Valley 

remains subject to the requirements of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

applicable to ‘‘Severe’’ nonattainment 

areas. 

We discuss the CAA and regulatory 

requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment plans in more detail 

below. 

III. CARB’s SIP Submittals To Address 

the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards in 

the Coachella Valley Nonattainment 

Area 

A. CARB’s SIP Submittals 

Designation of an area as 

nonattainment starts the process for a 

state to develop and submit to the EPA 

a SIP providing for attainment of the 

NAAQS under title 1, part D of the 

CAA. For areas designated as 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2004, 

this attainment SIP was due by June 15, 

2007. See CAA section 172(b). CARB 

made the following five SIP submittals 

to address the CAA planning 

requirements for attaining the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS for the Coachella 

Valley (and other areas as noted): 

• ‘‘Final 2007 Air Quality 

Management Plan,’’ South Coast Air 

Quality Management District, June 2007 

(2007 AQMP); 9

• ‘‘2007 State Strategy for the 

California State Implementation Plan,’’ 

Release Date April 26, 2007 and 

Appendices A—G, CARB, Release Date 

May 7, 2007 (2007 State Strategy); 10

• ‘‘Status Report on the State Strategy 

for California’s 2007 State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) and 

Proposed Revision to the SIP Reflecting 

Implementation of the 2007 State 

Strategy,’’ CARB, Release Date: March 

24, 2009 (2009 State Strategy Status 

Report); 

• ‘‘Progress Report on 

Implementation of PM2.5 State 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75767 

11See letter from Richard Corey, Executive 

Officer CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, U.S. EPA, dated November 6, 2014 

with enclosures. 

12 ‘‘Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress 

Toward Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality 

Standards for Ozone and Setting Transportation 

Conformity Budgets for Ventura County, Antelope 

Valley—Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, 

Eastern Kern County, and Imperial County’’ 

(revised), CARB (February 27, 2008). 

13For example, portions of the 2007 AQMP, 2007 

State Strategy, and the 2011 State Strategy Progress 

Report were approved in EPA actions on the 

SCAQMD Attainment Plan for the 1997 8-hour 

Ozone Standards. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012) 

and 79 FR 52539 (September 3, 2014). 

Implementation Plans (SIP) for the 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air 

Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,’’ 

CARB, Release Date March 29, 2011 

(2011 State Strategy Progress Report); 

and 

• ‘‘Staff Report, Proposed Updates to 

the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, State 

Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley 

and Western Mojave Desert,’’ CARB, 

Release Date: September 22, 2014 (2014 

SIP Update).11

Additionally, on March 24, 2008, 

CARB submitted an Ozone Early 

Progress Plan 12 for several areas, 

including the Coachella Valley. The 

plan consisted of motor vehicle 

emissions budgets for transportation 

conformity. The EPA found the 

Coachella Valley NOX and VOC budgets 

adequate for the 1997 ozone standards, 

effective May 22, 2008. See 73 FR 25694 

(May 7, 2008). 

In today’s proposal, we refer to the 

portions of these documents relevant to 

the Coachella Valley collectively as the 

‘‘Coachella Valley Ozone Plan’’ or ‘‘the 

Plan.’’ EPA has already approved 

portions of these documents in actions 

for other nonattainment areas.13

Similarly, in today’s proposal, we are 

evaluating and proposing action on only 

those portions of the 2007 AQMP that 

are relevant to attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in the Coachella 

Valley. Below is a description of the 

portions that are relevant to the 

Coachella Valley. 

2007 AQMP 

The 2007 AQMP discusses attainment 

of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for both the 

South Coast Air Basin and Coachella 

Valley, and the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS 

for the South Coast Air Basin. We are 

only acting on the ozone portions of the 

2007 AQMP, and only on the portions 

applicable to the Coachella Valley, 

which includes the following sections of 

the 2007 AQMP: the emissions 

estimates, RFP demonstrations, and 

motor vehicle emission budgets for the 

Coachella Valley in Chapter 8; the 

detailed base and future emission 

inventories in Appendix III; the 

modeling for the attainment 

demonstration in Chapter 5 and 

Appendix V; the control strategy in 

Chapters 4 and 7; and the RACM 

discussion in Chapter 6 and Appendix 

VI. 

State Strategy 

The 2007 State Strategy, as amended 

by the 2009 State Strategy Status Report 

and 2011 State Strategy Progress Report, 

provides a RACM demonstration for 

mobile sources. The relevant portions of 

the 2007 State Strategy include Chapter 

3, which describes California’s SIP 

commitments, and Chapter 5, which 

lists individual measures in more detail, 

as part of the State’s submittal. We note, 

however, that other portions of the 2007 

State Strategy contain additional 

information relevant to Coachella 

Valley, such as emissions reductions 

from the Strategy contained in 

Appendix A. Appendix F of the 2011 

State Strategy Progress Report provides 

revised control measure commitments 

and a revised rule implementation 

schedule for the 2007 AQMP. 

2014 SIP Update 

The 2014 SIP Update, which covers 

both the Coachella Valley and Western 

Mojave Desert 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas, updates the 

following sections of the 2007 AQMP: 

emissions inventories; RFP 

demonstration, and vehicle miles 

travelled (VMT) offset demonstration. 

The 2014 SIP Update also updates the 

motor vehicle emissions budgets in the 

Ozone Early Progress Plan mentioned 

above. It also revises the attainment 

targets for NOX and VOC emissions, 

using the same percentage reduction 

from the 2002 baseline as planned in the 

2007 AQMP. Finally, the 2014 SIP 

Update (and 2007 AQMP) also contain 

contingency measures to be 

implemented in the event the area fails 

to meet an RFP milestone or fails to 

attain by the applicable date, as required 

by CAA section 172(c)(9). We are not 

proposing action on these contingency 

measures at this time. Contingency 

measures are a distinct provision of the 

Clean Air Act that we may act on 

separately from the attainment 

requirements. 

B. CAA Procedural and Administrative 

Requirements for SIP Submittals 

CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 

110(l) require a state to provide 

reasonable public notice and 

opportunity for public hearing prior to 

the adoption and submittal of a SIP or 

SIP revision. To meet this requirement, 

every SIP submittal should include 

evidence that adequate public notice 

was given and an opportunity for a 

public hearing was provided consistent 

with the EPA’s implementing 

regulations in 40 CFR 51.102. 

The SCAQMD and CARB provided 

public notice and an opportunity for 

public comment through public 

comment periods, and held public 

hearings prior to adopting the 

components of the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan. Hearing and adoption dates 

are shown in Table 1. The SCAQMD’s 

and CARB’s submittals both include 

proof of publication for notices of the 

District’s and CARB’s public hearings, 

as evidence that all hearings were 

properly noticed. Therefore, we find the 

submittals meet the procedural 

requirements of CAA sections 110(a) 

and 110(l). 

TABLE 1—AGENCIES AND ADOPTION DATES FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY ATTAINMENT PLAN FOR THE 1997 OZONE

STANDARDS

Agency/Submittal Start of public notice Hearing and adoption dates Board 

resolution 

SCAQMD/2007 AQMP ............................................ March 2, 2007 ......... June 1, 2007 ........................................................... 07–9 

CARB/2007 State Strategy ...................................... May 7, 2007 ............ June 21 and 22, 2007, and July 27, 2007 .............. 07–28 

CARB/2007 AQMP .................................................. August 10, 2007 ...... September 27, 2007 ............................................... 07–41 

CARB/2009 State Strategy Status Report .............. March 24, 2009 ....... April 23, 2009 .......................................................... 09–34 

CARB/2011 State Strategy Progress Report .......... March 29, 2011 ....... April 28, 2011 .......................................................... 11–24 

CARB/2014 SIP Update .......................................... September 22, 2014 October 24, 2014 .................................................... 14–29 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75768 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

14 ‘‘Emission Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

and Regional Haze Regulations’’ (EPA–454/R–05– 

001, August 2005, updated November 2005) and 

‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards—Phase 2’’ 

(70 FR 71612). 

15 ‘‘Attainment year’’ refers to the ozone season 

immediately preceding a nonattainment area’s 

attainment date. In the case of the Coachella Valley, 

the applicable attainment date is June 15, 2019, and 

the ozone season immediately preceding that date 

will occur in year 2018. 

16EMFAC2011’s approval is granted in 78 FR 

14533. More recently, the EPA approved 

EMFAC2014 as the model for estimating on-road 

emissions. That approval allowed the continued use 

of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 

77337. 

CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that 

the EPA determine whether a SIP 

submittal is complete within 60 days of 

receipt. This section of the CAA also 

provides that any plan that the EPA has 

not affirmatively determined to be 

complete or incomplete will be deemed 

complete by operation of law six 

months after the date of submittal. The 

EPA’s SIP completeness criteria are 

found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. 

The EPA’s completeness determinations 

for each submittal are shown in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—SUBMITTALS AND COMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY OZONE PLAN

Submittal Submittal date Completeness date 

2007 State Strategy ................................................................................ November 16, 2007 ....................... May 14, 2008. 

2007 AQMP ............................................................................................. November 28, 2007 ....................... May 26, 2008. 

2009 State Strategy Status Report ......................................................... August 12, 2009 ............................ February 8, 2010. 

2011 State Strategy Progress Report ..................................................... July 29, 2011 ................................. January 25 2012. 

2014 SIP Update ..................................................................................... November 6, 2014 ......................... May 5, 2015. 

IV. Review of the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan 

A. Emissions Inventories 

1. Requirements for Emissions 

Inventories 

CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each 

state with an ozone nonattainment area 

classified under subpart 2 to submit a 

‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources’’ of the relevant pollutants in 

accordance with guidance provided by 

the Administrator. While this inventory 

is not a specific requirement under the 

anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 

51.1105 and 51.1100(o), it provides 

support for demonstrations required 

under these anti-backsliding rules. 

Additionally, a baseline emissions 

inventory is needed for the attainment 

demonstration and for meeting RFP 

requirements. EPA’s 1997 Ozone 

Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as 

the baseline year for the SIP planning 

emissions inventory. See 69 FR 23980 

(October 27, 2004). EPA emissions 

inventory guidance sets specific 

planning requirements pertaining to 

future milestone years for reporting RFP 

and to attainment demonstration 

years.14 Key RFP analysis years in the 

RFP demonstration include 2008 and 

every subsequent 3 years until the 

attainment date. 

We have evaluated the emissions 

inventories in the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan to determine if they are 

consistent with EPA guidance and 

adequate to support the Plan’s RACM, 

RFP, rate of progress (ROP) and 

attainment demonstrations. 

2. Emissions Inventories in the 

Coachella Valley Ozone Plan 

Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update 

contains detailed emissions inventories 

for the Coachella Valley. A partial 

summary of this information is 

contained in Table 3. The average 

summer weekday emissions typical of 

the ozone season are used for the 2002 

base year planning inventory and the 

2018 attainment year.15 These 

inventories incorporate reductions from 

federal, state, and district control 

measures received by CARB through 

September 2012. 

TABLE 3—COACHELLA VALLEY NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARIES FOR THE 2002 BASE YEAR AND 2018 

ATTAINMENT YEAR

[Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] a

Category 

NOX VOC 

2002 2018 2002 2018 

Stationary Sources .......................................................................................... 0.875 0.851 3.067 4.182 

Area Sources ................................................................................................... 0.492 0.305 5.061 3.863 

On-Road Mobile Sources ................................................................................ 33.009 10.558 9.294 2.897

Other Mobile Sources ...................................................................................... 8.912 5.109 5.287 3.919 

Totals b ...................................................................................................... 43.287 16.823 22.709 14.861 

aSource: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix A, Table A–1. 

bBecause of rounding conventions, source categories may not add to the exact emission totals. 

The on-road motor vehicles inventory 

category consists of trucks, automobiles, 

buses, and motorcycles. California’s 

model for estimating emissions from onroad motor vehicles operating in 

California is referred to as ‘‘EMFAC’’ 

(short for EMission FACtor). EMFAC 

has undergone many revisions over the 

years. At the time the 2014 SIP Update 

was submitted, EMFAC2011 was the 

model approved by the EPA for 

estimating on-road motor source 

emissions in California.16 See 78 FR 

14533 (March 6, 2013). Appendix D of 

the 2014 SIP Update contains the latest 

on-road motor vehicle summer planning 

VOC and NOX inventories, vehicle 

population, VMT and trips for each 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75769 

17SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan 2012– 

2035, including Amendment #1 and #2 and the Air 

Quality Conformity Analysis. April 2012. Federal 

Highway Administration approval July 15, 2013. 

18 Detailed information on CARB’s off-road motor 

vehicle emissions inventory methodologies is found 

at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/ 

categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles. 

19The CEIDARS database consists of two 

categories of information: source information and 

utility information. Source information includes the 

basic inventory information generated and collected 

on all point and area sources. Utility information 

generally includes auxiliary data, which helps 

categorize and further define the source 

information. Used together, CEIDARS is capable of 

generating complex reports based on a multitude of 

category and source selection criteria. 

20 Detailed information on the area-wide source 

category emissions is found on the CARB Web site: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm. 

21Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains 

the estimated VOC and NOX stationary, area-wide 

and off-road forecast summaries by Emission 

Inventory Code categories for the Coachella Valley 

from CEPAM. A CEPAM inventory tool was created 

to support the development of the 2012 PM2.5 SIPs 

due at that time. The tool was designed to support 

all of the modeling, planning, and reporting 

requirements due at that time and includes updates 

for all the pollutants (e.g., NOX and VOC). Modeling 

results, which are summarized in Appendix A, are 

available separately in electronic file format. 

22 2014 SIP Update, page A–1 

23See 57 FR 13498, 13560. The General Preamble 

describes the EPA’s preliminary view on how we 

would interpret various SIP planning provisions in 

title I of the CAA as amended in 1990, including 

those planning provisions applicable to the 1-hour 

ozone standards. The EPA continues to rely on 

certain guidance in the General Preamble to 

implement the 8-hour ozone standards under 

title I. 

24Available at www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/ 

t1pgm.html. 

25See Seitz memo and General Preamble at 

13560; see also ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for Proposed Rulemaking on 

Approval of Plan Revisions for Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ 44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979) and 

Memorandum dated December 14, 2000, from John 

S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, ‘‘Additional Submission on RACM 

from States with Severe One-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area SIPs.’’ 

EMFAC vehicle class category for the 

Coachella Valley. The motor vehicle 

emissions in the Plan are based on 

CARB’s EMFAC2011 emission factor 

model and the latest planning 

assumptions from Southern California 

Association of Government’s (SCAG’s) 

2012–2035 Regional Transportation 

Plan.17

The 2014 SIP Update contains offroad VOC and NOX inventories 

developed by CARB using categoryspecific methods and models.18 The offroad mobile source category includes 

aircraft, trains, ships, and off-road 

vehicles and equipment used for 

construction, farming, commercial, 

industrial, and recreational activities. 

The stationary source category of the 

emissions inventory includes nonmobile, fixed sources of air pollution 

comprised of individual industrial, 

manufacturing, and commercial 

facilities. Examples of stationary sources 

(a.k.a., point sources) include fuel 

combustion (e.g., electric utilities), 

waste disposal (e.g., landfills), cleaning 

and surface coatings (e.g., printing), 

petroleum production and marketing, 

and industrial processes (e.g., chemical). 

Stationary source operators report to the 

District the process and emissions data 

used to calculate emissions from point 

sources. The District then enters the 

information reported by emission 

sources into the California Emission 

Inventory Development and Reporting 

System (CEIDARS) database.19

The area sources category includes 

aggregated emissions data from 

processes that are individually small 

and widespread or not well-defined 

point sources. The area source 

subcategories include solvent 

evaporation (e.g., consumer products 

and architectural coatings) and 

miscellaneous processes (e.g., 

residential fuel combustion and farming 

operations). Emissions from these 

sources are calculated from product 

sales, population, employment data, and 

other parameters for a wide range of 

activities that generate air pollution in 

the Coachella Valley.20

The emission inventories in the 2014 

SIP Update use the California Emission 

Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM).21

The CEPAM model used in the 2014 SIP 

Update is based on a 2008 baseline 

inventory developed using the methods 

and databases described above (e.g., 

EMFAC2011; CEIDARS; and CARB 

modular off-road equipment updates 

such as the 2011 In-Use Off-Road 

Equipment model, Transportation 

Refrigeration Units model, and Cargo 

Handling Equipment model.). The 

inventory was calibrated to 2008 

emissions and activity levels, and 

inventories for other years are back-cast 

(e.g., 2002) or forecast (e.g., 2018) using 

CEPAM from that base inventory.22

3. Proposed Action on the Emissions 

Inventories 

We have reviewed the emissions 

inventories in the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan and the inventory 

methodologies used by the District and 

CARB for consistency with CAA section 

182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We find 

that the base year and projected 

attainment year inventories are 

comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventories of actual and projected 

emissions of NOX and VOC in the 

Coachella Valley as of the date of the 

submittal. Accordingly, we propose to 

find that these inventories provide an 

appropriate basis for the various other 

elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone 

Plan, including the RACM, ROP, RFP, 

and attainment demonstrations. 

B. Reasonably Available Control 

Measures Demonstration and Adopted 

Control Strategy 

1. RACM Requirements 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

each attainment plan provide for the 

implementation of all reasonable 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable and provide 

for attainment of the NAAQS. The 

RACM demonstration requirement is a 

continuing applicable requirement for 

the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s 

anti-backsliding rules that apply once a 

standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17). 

The EPA has previously provided 

guidance interpreting the RACM 

requirement in the ‘‘General Preamble 

for the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ 

(‘‘General Preamble’’) 23 and in a 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

Reasonably Available Control Measures 

(RACM) Requirements and Attainment 

Demonstration Submissions for the 

Ozone NAAQS,’’ John Seitz, November 

30, 1999 (Seitz memo).24 In summary, 

EPA guidance provides that to address 

the requirement to adopt all RACM, 

states should consider all potentially 

reasonable control measures for source 

categories in the nonattainment area to 

determine whether they are reasonably 

available for implementation in that 

area and whether they would, if 

implemented individually or 

collectively, advance the area’s 

attainment date by one year or more.25

Any measures that are necessary to 

meet these requirements that are not 

already either federally promulgated, 

part of the state’s SIP, or otherwise 

creditable in SIPs must be submitted in 

enforceable form as part of a state’s 

attainment plan for the area. CAA 

section 172(c)(6) requires nonattainment 

plans to include enforceable emission 

limitations, and such other control 

measures, means or techniques 

(including economic incentives such as 

fees, marketable permits, and auctions 

of emission rights), as well as schedules 

and timetables for compliance, as may 

be necessary or appropriate to provide 

for attainment of such standards in such 

area by the applicable attainment date. 

See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A). 

The purpose of the RACM analysis is 

to determine whether or not control 

measures exist that are economically 

and technically reasonable and that 

provide emissions reductions that 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75770 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

26 2007 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI–1 and 2. 27 2007 AQMP, Tables 4–1, 4–2A and 4–2B. 28Attachment A of the 2007 AQMP, SCAQMD 

Board Resolution 07–9, dated June 1, 2007. 

would advance the attainment date for 

nonattainment areas. The EPA defines 

RACM as any potential control measure 

for application to point, area, on-road 

and non-road emission source categories 

that: (1) Is technologically feasible; (2) is 

economically feasible; (3) does not 

cause ‘‘substantial widespread and longterm adverse impacts’’; (4) is not 

‘‘absurd, unenforceable, or 

impracticable’’; and (5) can advance the 

attainment date by at least one year. 

General Preamble at 13560. 

For ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as moderate or above, CAA 

section 182(b)(2) also requires 

implementation of RACT for all major 

sources of VOC and for each VOC 

source category for which the EPA has 

issued a Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) document. CAA section 182(f) 

requires that RACT under section 

182(b)(2) also apply to major stationary 

sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major 

source is a stationary source that emits 

or has the potential to emit at least 25 

tons of VOC or NOX per year. CAA 

section 182(d). Under the 8-hour ozone 

implementation rule, states were 

required to submit SIP revisions 

meeting the RACT requirements of CAA 

sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) no later 

than 27 months after designation for the 

8-hour ozone standards (September 15, 

2006, for areas designated in April 2004) 

and to implement the required RACT 

measures no later than 30 months after 

that submittal deadline. See 40 CFR 

51.912(a). The EPA has approved the 

RACT SIP for the SCAQMD for the 1997 

ozone standards, which included rules 

applicable to the Coachella Valley. See 

73 FR 76947 (December 18, 2008). 

2. Control Strategy and RACM 

Demonstration in the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan 

a. The District’s RACM Demonstration 

Appendix VI of the 2007 AQMP 

includes a RACM demonstration 

covering both the South Coast Air Basin 

and the Coachella Valley, which focuses 

on control measures for stationary and 

area sources. The process to identify 

RACM involved public meetings to 

solicit input, evaluation of the EPA’s 

suggested RACM, and evaluation of air 

emissions rules in other areas (including 

the San Joaquin Valley, the San 

Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, 

Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth, the 

Houston-Galveston area and the Lake 

Michigan Air Directors Consortium). 

The District also reevaluated all 82 of its 

existing rules and regulations. The 

RACM evaluation process included a 

summit where CARB technical experts, 

local government representatives and 

the public suggested alternative ways to 

attain air quality standards. More than 

200 potential control measures were 

identified. The District then screened 

the identified measures and rejected 

those that would not individually or 

collectively advance attainment in the 

area by at least one year, had already 

been adopted as rules, or were in the 

process of being adopted. The remaining 

measures were evaluated by taking into 

account baseline inventories, available 

control technologies, and potential 

emission reductions as well as whether 

the measure could be implemented on 

a schedule that would advance 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standards by at least a year.26

Based on this analysis, SCAQMD 

scheduled 16 new or revised stationary 

source control measures for 

development and adoption, including 

revisions to make SCAQMD rules at 

least as stringent as other California 

districts’ rules and several innovative 

measures. Since submission of the 

AQMP in 2007, the SCAQMD has 

adopted 12 of these rules and submitted 

them to the EPA for approval into the 

SIP. Table 4 lists the measures 

identified in the 2007 AQMP,27 with 

citations to the Federal Register notice 

that incorporates each measure into the 

SIP, where applicable. These rules are 

part of the District’s enforceable 

commitment to achieve emissions 

reductions. However, the District 

acknowledged that its commitment to 

adopt any given rule might prove to be 

infeasible, meaning the control 

technology may not be available or 

achievement of the emissions 

reductions may not be cost effective. In 

adopting the 2007 AQMP, the SCAQMD 

Board committed to ‘‘substitute any 

other measures as necessary to make up 

any emissions reduction shortfall.’’ 28

TABLE 4—STATUS OF RACM RULES IDENTIFIED IN SCAQMD 2007 AQMP 

Control 

measure Rule No. Title 

Ozone 

precursor 

controlled 

Federal Register notice 

adopting 

rule into the SIP 

CTS–01 ...... 1144 .......................... Metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants .......... VOC ................... 76 FR 70888, 11/16/2011. 

CTS–04 ...... 1143 .......................... Consumer Paint Thinners and Multi-Purpose Solvents VOC ................... 76 FR 70888, 11/16/2011. 

CMB–01 ...... 1147 .......................... NOX reductions from miscellaneous sources ................ NOX .................... 75 FR 46845, 08/04/2010. 

CMB–03 ...... 1111 .......................... Further NOX reductions from space heaters ................. NOX .................... 75 FR 46845, 08/04/2010. 

FUG–02 ...... 461 ............................ Gasoline transfer and dispensing (VOC) ....................... VOC ................... 78 FR 21543, 04/11/2013. 

FUG–04 ...... 1149 .......................... Storage Tank and Pipeline Cleaning and Degassing .... VOC ................... 74 FR 67821, 12/21/2009. 

MCS–01 ...... 1110.2 ....................... Liquid and gaseous fuels—stationary ICEs (NOX and 

VOC).

NOX and VOC .... 74 FR 18995, April 27, 

2009. 

MCS–01 ...... 1146 .......................... NOX from industrial, institutional, commercial boilers, 

steam generators, and process heaters.

NOX .................... 79 FR 57442, 09/25/2014. 

MCS–01 ...... 1146.1 ....................... NOX from small ind, inst, & commercial boilers, steam 

gens, and process heaters.

NOX .................... 79 FR 57442, 09/25/2014. 

MCS–05 ...... 1127 .......................... Livestock waste (VOC) ................................................... VOC ................... 78 FR 30768, 05/23/2013. 

Measures not yet adopted or not approved in the SIP by EPA 

EGM–01 ..... 2301 ..........................

(proposed) ................

Emissions reductions from new or redevelopment 

projects (Indirect Sources).

NOX and VOC .... No rule associated with this 

measure.a

FLX–02 ....... n/a ............................. Refinery pilot program (VOC) ........................................ VOC ................... No rule associated with this 

measure. 

MOB–05 ..... Title 13 Cal. Code of 

Regulations § 2622.

AB923 LDV high emitter program .................................. NOX and VOC .... n/a.b


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75771 

29More recently, the EPA determined that the 

South Coast RECLAIM program did not meet RACM 

for PM2.5 because it allowed facilities to delay 

installation of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to 

control NOX emissions. See 81 FR 22025 (April 14, 

2016). Only two facilities in Coachella Valley are 

part of the RECLAIM program and both facilities 

have an oxidation catalyst and SCR on each gas 

turbine. The Title V Permits for these facilities are 

included in the administrative record for this 

action. Additionally, SCAQMD Rule 2005 requires 

all emissions sources at any new or relocated 

RECLAIM facility to apply the best available control 

technology. 

30Final Air Quality Management Plan, February 

2013, South Coast Air Quality Management District. 

31For example, CMB–03: Reductions from 

Commercial Space Heating (Rule 1111) and FUG– 

02: Emission Reduction from LPG Transfer and 

Dispensing—Phase II (Rule 1177). 

32For example, CMB–01: Further NOX

Reductions from RECLAIM. 

TABLE 4—STATUS OF RACM RULES IDENTIFIED IN SCAQMD 2007 AQMP—Continued 

Control 

measure Rule No. Title 

Ozone 

precursor 

controlled 

Federal Register notice 

adopting 

rule into the SIP 

MOB–06 ..... Title 13 Cal. Code of 

Regulations § 2622.

AB923 MDV high emitter program ................................. NOX and VOC .... n/a.b

n/a ............... 2449 .......................... SOON program .............................................................. NOX .................... (proposed approval) 81 FR 

12637, 03/10/2016. 

a The District has not finalized Rule 2301. b SCAQMD implements this program through CARB’s Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program. 

n/a = not applicable. 

The EPA determined that the 2007 

AQMP met the RACM requirement for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the 

South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674 

(March 1, 2012).29 CARB submitted a 

2012 Air Quality Management Plan 

(2012 AQMP), developed by the 

SCAQMD, in February 2013 with 

additional information about the 

Coachella Valley, including data and 

discussion on air quality, pollutant 

transport, emissions inventories, 

attainment demonstration, and 

projections of future air quality.30 For 

the 2012 AQMP, the SCAQMD followed 

a process similar to that used for the 

2007 AQMP, which included public 

meetings to solicit input, evaluation of 

EPA’s suggested RACM, and evaluation 

of other air agencies’ regulations. See 

Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. The 

District states in the 2012 AQMP that 

‘‘the 2007 AQMP adequately addressed 

and satisfied the CAA planning 

requirements for ozone in the Coachella 

Valley, and this chapter [Chapter 7: 

Current & Future Air Quality—Desert 

Nonattainment Areas] is for information 

only.’’ The 2012 AQMP does, however, 

include a new RACM demonstration. 

See Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. It 

includes new and revised rules for the 

District since the adoption of the 2007 

AQMP. The EPA approved the RACM 

demonstration in the 2012 AQMP as a 

revision to the SIP for both the 1-hour 

and 1997 8-hour ozone standards for the 

South Coast Air Basin. See 79 FR 52526 

(September 3, 2014). Many of the new 

rules have been incorporated into the 

SIP,31 some have been proposed by the 

District but not incorporated into the 

SIP,32 and others have yet to be 

proposed locally. 

c. Local Jurisdiction RACM 

Demonstration 

With respect to on-road mobile 

sources, we note that SCAG is the 

designated metropolitan planning 

organization (MPO) for a large portion of 

southern California, including Coachella 

Valley, and SCAG’s membership 

includes local jurisdictions within the 

Coachella Valley. For the 2007 AQMP, 

SCAG evaluated a list of possible 

transportation control measures (TCMs) 

as one element of the larger RACM 

evaluation for the plan. TCMs are, in 

general, measures designed to reduce 

emissions from on-road motor vehicles 

through reductions in VMT or traffic 

congestion. SCAG’s TCM development 

process is described in Appendix IV–C 

(‘‘Regional Transportation Strategy and 

Control Measures’’) of the 2007 AQMP, 

pages 49 to 55. 

In our final action on the 2007 AQMP 

for the South Coast Air Basin, we 

concluded that the evaluation processes 

undertaken by SCAG were consistent 

with the EPA’s RACM guidance and 

found that there were no additional 

RACM, including no additional TCMs 

that would advance attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone standards in the 

South Coast Air Basin. See 76 FR 57872, 

at 57883 (September 16, 2011) 

(proposed rule); 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 

2012) (final rule). More recently, we 

came to the same conclusion with 

respect to RACM and TCMs for the 

South Coast in our action on the ozone 

portion of the 2012 AQMP. See 79 FR 

29712, at 29720 (May 23, 2014) 

(proposed rule); 79 FR 52526 

(September 3, 2014) (final rule). 

While TCMs are being implemented 

in the upwind South Coast Air Basin 

area to meet CAA requirements, neither 

the SCAQMD nor CARB rely on 

implementation of any TCMs in the 

Coachella Valley to demonstrate 

implementation of RACM in the 

Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The 

SCAQMD and CARB justify the absence 

of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by 

reference to the significant influence of 

pollutant transport from the South Coast 

Air Basin on ozone conditions in the 

Coachella Valley. We agree that 

pollutant transport from the South Coast 

Air Basin is significant, and find that, 

given the influence of such transport 

and the minimal and diminishing 

emissions benefit generally associated 

with TCMs, no TCM or combination of 

TCMs implemented in the Coachella 

Valley would advance the attainment 

date in the Coachella Valley, and thus, 

no TCMs are reasonably available for 

implementation in the Coachella Valley 

for the purposes of meeting the RACM 

requirement. Lastly, we note that, while 

not required for CAA purposes, SCAG’s 

most recent Regional Transportation 

Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy 

(RTP/SCS) (April 2016) includes a list of 

projects for the Coachella Valley, some 

of which represent the types of projects 

often identified as TCMs, such as traffic 

signalization projects and bike lane 

projects. See the transportation system 

project list for Riverside County, 

attached as an appendix to SCAG’s 

2016–2014 RTP/SCS (April 2016), 

available at http://scagrtpscs.net/ 

Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_

ProjectList.pdf. 

d. The State Strategy RACM 

Demonstration 

CARB has primary responsibility for 

reducing emissions in California from 

new and existing on-road and off-road 

engines and vehicles, motor vehicle 

fuels, and consumer products. Given the 

need for significant emissions 

reductions from mobile sources to meet 

the ozone standards in California 

nonattainment areas, CARB has been a 

leader in the development of stringent 

control measures for on-road and offroad mobile sources, fuels and 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75772 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

33Board Resolution 07–28, CARB, September 27, 

2007, page 7, Attachment B. 

34 2014 SIP Update, page A–1. 

35 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v. 

36 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v. 

37 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page 2. 

38 2011 State Strategy Progress Report at 

Appendix F (‘‘Revisions to 2007 P.M.2.5 and Ozone 

State Implementation Plan for South Coast Air 

Basin and Coachella Valley’’) (March 2011). 

39Based on data from Tables A–1 and A–2 of the 

2014 SIP Update. 

consumer products. Because of this role, 

the 2007 AQMP identifies CARB’s 2007 

State Strategy as a key component of the 

control strategy necessary to attain the 

1997 ozone standards. The 2007 State 

Strategy includes measures to reduce 

emissions from multiple sectors, 

including in-use heavy duty trucks, 

smog check improvements, 

reformulated gasoline, cleaner off-road 

equipment, cleaner consumer products, 

ships, harbor craft and port trucks. See 

2007 State Strategy, Chapter 5. 

CARB developed its 2007 State 

Strategy after an extensive public 

consultation process to identify 

potential SIP measures. From this 

process, CARB identified and 

committed to propose 15 new defined 

measures. These measures focus on 

cleaning up the in-use fleet as well as 

increasing the stringency of emissions 

standards for a number of engine 

categories, fuels, and consumer 

products. Many, if not most, of these 

measures have been adopted or are 

being proposed for adoption for the first 

time anywhere in the nation. They build 

on CARB’s already comprehensive 

program described above that addresses 

emissions from all types of mobile 

sources and consumer products, 

through both regulations and incentive 

programs. 

In adopting the 2007 State Strategy, 

CARB committed to reducing Coachella 

Valley NOX emissions by 7 tons per day 

(tpd) and VOC emissions by 2 tpd 

through the implementation of measures 

identified in the 2007 State Strategy.33

However, this proposed action does not 

rely on the NOX and VOC commitments 

in the 2007 State Strategy, because the 

2014 SIP Update shows that the 

Coachella Valley would meet the NOX

and VOC attainment and RFP goals, 

under existing rules received through 

September 2012.34

CARB adopted the 2009 State Strategy 

Status Report in April 2009. This 

submittal updated the 2007 State 

Strategy to reflect its implementation 

during 2007 and 2008, and also to 

reflect changes resulting from the 

adoption of the scoping plan mandated 

by Assembly Bill 32 that will help 

reduce ozone during SIP 

implementation.35 The update also 

changes assumptions about economic 

conditions and the availability of 

incentive funds.36 Finally, the 2007 

State Strategy was revised to address 

approvability issues brought up by the 

EPA.37

CARB again revised the state strategy 

in the 2011 State Strategy Progress 

Report. While the changes primarily 

address attainment of the 1997 PM2.5

standards, the 2011 State Strategy 

Progress Report also includes an 

appendix that updates the control 

measure adoption schedule and revises 

the emissions estimates to reflect 

changes made by CARB to the on-road 

truck and off-road equipment rules in 

2010.38

We have previously determined that 

CARB’s mobile source control programs 

constituted RACM for the attainment 

plan for the 1997 Ozone NAAQS in the 

South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674 

(March 1, 2012). Since then, CARB has 

adopted additional mobile source 

control measures including the 

Advanced Clean Cars program (also 

known as the Low Emission Vehicle 

Program III or LEV–III), heavy-duty 

vehicle idling rules, revisions to CARB’s 

in-use rules for on-road and non-road 

diesel vehicles, and emissions standards 

for non-road equipment, cargo handling 

equipment, and recreational vehicles. 

See 81 FR 39424 (June 18, 2016). 

3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the Control 

Strategy and RACM 

For the Coachella Valley in 2017 (the 

year prior to the attainment year), the 

emissions inventory shows that nearly 

all of the locally generated NOX

emissions (93%) and nearly half of the 

VOC emissions (48%) derive from 

mobile sources.39 Mobile source 

emissions are well controlled 

throughout California because of 

stringent control measures in place for 

on-road and off-road mobile sources and 

fuels. See, e.g., 2007 State Strategy, p. 

37. Additionally, as noted above, the 

EPA has already determined CARB’s 

rules in the 2007 State Strategy, as 

revised in 2009 and 2011, meet RACM, 

and CARB continues to adopt new and 

more stringent mobile source rules. In 

view of the transport of pollutants into 

the Coachella Valley from the South 

Coast Air Basin (see discussion at 

section I.B above) and the extensive 

control of mobile sources by CARB, we 

propose to find that the Coachella 

Valley Ozone Plan provides for 

implementation of all RACM necessary 

to demonstrate expeditious attainment 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in 

the Coachella Valley, consistent with 

the applicable requirements of CAA 

section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17). 

C. Attainment Demonstration 

1. Requirements for Attainment 

Demonstrations 

CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) requires 

states with ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as ‘‘Serious’’ or above to 

submit plans that demonstrate 

attainment of the ozone NAAQS as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than the specified attainment date. For 

any ozone nonattainment area classified 

as serious or above, section 182(c)(2)(A) 

of the CAA specifically requires the 

State to submit a modeled attainment 

demonstration based on a 

photochemical grid modeling evaluation 

or any other analytical method 

determined by the Administrator to be 

at least as effective as photochemical 

modeling. The attainment 

demonstration requirement is a 

continuing applicable requirement for 

the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s 

anti-backsliding rules that apply once a 

standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12). 

For more detail on the requirements 

for modeling an 8-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration, see the 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

today’s proposal. The modeling section 

of the TSD includes a complete list of 

applicable modeling guidance 

documents. These documents describe 

the components of the attainment 

demonstration, explain how the 

modeling and other analyses should be 

conducted, and provide overall 

guidance on the technical analyses for 

attainment demonstrations. 

As with any predictive tool, inherent 

uncertainties are associated with 

photochemical grid modeling. The 

EPA’s guidance recognizes these 

limitations and provides recommended 

approaches for considering other 

analytical evidence to help assess 

whether attainment of the NAAQS is 

likely. This process is called a weight of 

evidence (WOE) analysis. 

The EPA’s modeling guidance 

(updated in 1996, 1999, and 2002) 

discusses various WOE analyses. This 

guidance was updated again in 2005 

and 2007 for the 1997 8-hour attainment 

demonstration procedures to include a 

WOE analysis as an integral part of any 

attainment demonstration. This 

guidance strongly recommends that all 

attainment demonstrations include 

supplemental analyses beyond the 

recommended modeling. These 

supplemental analyses can provide 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75773 

40Carter, W.P.L., May 8, 2000a. Documentation of 

the SAPRC–99 chemical mechanism for VOC 

reactivity assessment. Report to the California Air 

Resources Board, Contracts 92–329 and 95–308. 

41Final Report, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure 

Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES–III), 

SCAQMD, September 2008. 

42Future year controlled emissions were 

estimated from the baseline emissions using the 

CEPA control factors for the simulations, are given 

in Table V–4–4 of the 2007 South Coast AQMP, 

Appendix V. 

43 2007 AQMP, Appendix V, page V–4–52, Table 

V–4–17. 

44See footnote 6. 

additional information such as data 

analyses, and emissions and air quality 

trends, which can help strengthen the 

conclusion based on the photochemical 

grid modeling. 

2. 8-Hour Attainment Demonstration 

Modeling and Weight of Evidence 

Analysis in the South Coast 2007 AQMP 

a. Photochemical Grid Modeling 

Attainment Demonstration Results 

i. Photochemical Grid Model 

The model selected for the 2007 

AQMP attainment demonstrations is the 

Comprehensive Air Quality Model with 

Extensions (CAMx), version 4.4 

(Environ, 2006), using Statewide Air 

Pollution Research Center-99 (SAPRC– 

99) gas phase mechanisms (Carter, 

2000).40 The modeling system 

(including the photochemical model, 

meteorological inputs, and chemical 

mechanism) is consistent with the 

previous advice of outside peer 

reviewers. CAMx is a state-of-the-art air 

quality model that can simulate ozone 

and PM2.5 concentrations together in a 

‘‘one-atmosphere’’ approach for 

attainment demonstrations. CAMx is 

designed to integrate the output from 

both prognostic and diagnostic 

meteorological models. 

ii. Episode Selection 

Six meteorological episodes from 

three years are used as the basis for the 

plan. An earlier modeling effort, 

contained in SCAQMD’s 2003 Air 

Quality Management Plan, benefited 

from the intensive monitoring 

conducted under the 1997 Southern 

California Ozone Study (SCOS 1997) 

where the August 4–7, 1997, episode 

was the cornerstone of the modeling 

analysis. One of the primary modeling 

episodes used in the earlier modeling 

from August 5–6, 1997, was also 

selected for this plan. In addition, five 

episodes that occurred during the 

Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III 

(MATES–III) sampling program in 2004 

(August 7–8) and 2005 (May 21–22, July 

15–19, August 4–6, and August 27–28) 

were selected.41 The TSD for today’s 

proposal provides further information. 

iii. Model Performance 

The modeling for the Coachella Valley 

attainment demonstration uses the same 

approach used for the South Coast Air 

Basin attainment demonstration, which 

was based on an air quality modeling 

domain that covers the entire South 

Coast Air Basin, the Coachella Valley, 

and much of southern California. Model 

performance was evaluated in three 

zones in the South Coast Basin: The San 

Fernando Valley; the eastern San 

Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino 

Valleys; and Los Angeles and Orange 

County. Normalized Gross Bias, 

Normalized Gross Error, and Peak 

Prediction Accuracy were determined 

for each area. Although not a 

requirement for determining acceptable 

model performance, the performance 

statistics were compared to the EPA 

performance goals presented in 

guidance documents. The performance 

goals for Normalized Gross Error and 

Peak Prediction Accuracy were met in 

the eastern San Gabriel, Riverside and 

San Bernardino Valleys. In general, the 

statistic for bias (Normalized Gross Bias) 

tends to be negative, indicating that the 

model tends to slightly under-predict 

ozone. Based on the analysis, the 

SCAQMD concludes that model 

performance is acceptable for this 

application. 

b. Modeling Approaches for the 

Coachella Valley Attainment 

Demonstration 

CAMx simulations were conducted 

for the base year 2002, and future-year 

2017 baseline and controlled 

emissions.42 The ozone attainment 

demonstration relies on the use of sitespecific relative response factors (RRFs) 

being applied to the 2002 weighted 

design values. The RRFs are determined 

from the future year controlled and the 

2002 base year simulations. The initial 

screening for station days to be included 

in the attainment demonstration 

included the following criteria: (1) 

Having an observed concentration 

equaling or exceeding 85 parts per 

billion (ppb), and (2) a simulation 

predicted base year (1997, 2004 or 2005) 

concentration over 60 ppb. Additional 

criteria were added to the selection 

process as the simulations were 

evaluated. A minimum of five episode 

days are recommended to determine the 

site specific RRF. The TSD for today’s 

action has more information regarding 

the rationale for our proposed approval 

of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan 

modeling. 

c. Results of Modeling 

The attainment demonstration 

included in the 2007 AQMP indicates 

that the Coachella Valley will attain the 

federal 1997 8-hour ozone standards by 

the proposed attainment date of June 15, 

2019. The 2007 AQMP projects the 

Coachella Valley air monitoring stations 

of Palm Springs and Indio to have 8- 

hour ozone design values of 75.9 ppb 

and 66.2 ppb respectively in the year 

2017.43 More recent modeling in the 

2012 AQMP, as well as recent 

monitoring data, shows attainment by 

the 2018 attainment year. See the TSD 

for this action for more information. 

d. Transport From the South Coast Air 

Basin 

The South Coast Air Basin’s 

continued progress toward meeting the 

1997 ozone NAAQS is critical to the 

Coachella Valley’s ability to attain the 

1997 ozone standards. The Coachella 

Valley is downwind of the South Coast 

Air Basin, which is regulated by the 

SCAQMD. The 2007 AQMP states, 

‘‘pollutant transport from the South 

Coast Air Basin to the Coachella Valley 

is the primary cause of its ozone 

nonattainment status.’’ The plan cites 

several studies that confirm the 

transport between the two air basins.44

3. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Conclusions on the Modeling 

Demonstration 

We are proposing to approve an 

attainment date of June 15, 2019, which 

reflects a 2018 attainment year. This is 

based on our evaluation of the air 

quality modeling analyses in the 2007 

AQMP and our WOE analysis. The WOE 

analysis considered the attainment 

demonstration from the 2012 AQMP 

and more recent ambient air quality 

monitoring data that were not available 

at the time SCAQMD performed the 

attainment modeling. The basis for our 

proposed approval is discussed in more 

detail in the TSD. The modeling shows 

significant reductions in ozone from the 

base period. The most recent ambient 

air quality data that we have reviewed 

indicate that the area is on track to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards 

by 2018. 

Based on the analysis above and in 

the TSD, the EPA proposes to find that 

the air quality modeling in the 2007 

AQMP provides an adequate basis for 

the RACM, RFP and attainment 

demonstrations in the Coachella Valley 

Ozone Plan, and is consistent with the 

applicable requirements of CAA section 

182(c)(2)(a) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) 

and 51.1100(o)(12). 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75774 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

45EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, ‘‘NOX Substitution Guidance,’’ 

December 1993. 

D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable 

Further Progress Demonstrations 

1. Rate of Progress 

a. Requirements 

For areas classified as moderate or 

above, Section 182(b)(1) requires a SIP 

revision providing for rate of progress 

(ROP), defined as a one time, 15% 

actual VOC emission reduction during 

the six years following the baseline year 

1990, or an average of 3% per year. For 

areas designated serious nonattainment 

or above, no further action is necessary 

if the area fulfilled its ROP requirement 

for the 1-hour standards (from 1990– 

1996). As the EPA explained in the 1997 

Ozone Implementation Rule, 69 FR 

23980 (October 27, 2004), for areas that 

did not meet the 15% ROP reduction for 

the 1-hour ozone standards, a state may 

notify the EPA that it wishes to rely on 

a previously submitted SIP (for the 1- 

hour ozone standards), or it may elect to 

submit a new or revised SIP (for the 

1997 ozone standards) addressing the 

15% ROP reduction. The ROP 

demonstration requirement is a 

continuing applicable requirement for 

the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s 

anti-backsliding rules that apply once a 

standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4). 

The CAA outlines and EPA guidance 

details the method for calculating the 

requirements for the 1990–1996 period. 

Section 182(b)(1) requires that 

reductions: (1) Be in addition to those 

needed to offset any growth in 

emissions between the base year and the 

milestone year; (2) exclude emission 

reductions from four prescribed federal 

programs (i.e., the federal motor vehicle 

control program, the federal Reid vapor 

pressure (RVP) requirements, any RACT 

corrections previously specified by the 

EPA, and any inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) program corrections 

necessary to meet the basic I/M level); 

and (3) be calculated from an ‘‘adjusted’’ 

baseline relative to the year for which 

the reduction is applicable. 

The adjusted base year inventory 

excludes the emission reductions from 

fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996 

and from federal RVP regulations 

promulgated by November 15, 1990, or 

required under section 211(h) of the 

Act. The net effect of these adjustments 

is that states are not able to take credit 

for emissions reductions that would 

result from fleet turnover of current 

federal standard cars and trucks, or from 

already existing federal fuel regulations. 

However, the SIP can take full credit for 

the benefits of any new (i.e., post-1990) 

vehicle emissions standards, as well as 

any other new federal or state motor 

vehicle or fuel program that will be 

implemented in the nonattainment area, 

including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new 

evaporative emissions standards, 

reformulated gasoline, enhanced I/M, 

California low emissions vehicle 

program, transportation control 

measures, etc. 

While a SIP revision for attainment of 

the 1-hour ozone standards was 

submitted for the Southeast Desert area 

(i.e., the Coachella Valley and Western 

Mojave Desert areas), we have not 

approved the ROP plan for the 

reduction of VOCs. We provided notice 

that the Southeast Desert has attained 

the 1-hour standards on April 15, 2015. 

See 80 FR 20166 (April 15, 2015). Per 

40 CFR 51.1118, the RFP requirement 

(including the 15% ROP requirement for 

VOCs) no longer applies to the 1-hour 

ozone standards for the Southeast Desert 

area. Although the ROP provision is a 

one-time requirement, it remains in 

effect for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standards. Therefore, the Coachella 

Valley SIP must demonstrate a 15% 

ROP for VOC reductions by 2008, from 

the 2002 baseline. 

b. ROP Demonstration in the State 

Submittal 

The 2014 SIP Update incorporates the 

ROP demonstration as an element of the 

RFP demonstration. We note that this 

approach is valid, but different from the 

organization of this notice, where we 

first, and separately, assess the ROP 

demonstration and then assess the RFP 

demonstration. See section IV.D.2 for 

the RFP assessment. VOC emissions 

from the RFP tables for the Coachella 

Valley (see Table C–1 in the 2014 SIP 

Update), were used to create Table 5 

below. The revised 15% ROP VOC 

demonstration uses a 2002 average 

summer weekday emissions inventory 

as the base year inventory and addresses 

2002–2008. Based on the progress of the 

VOC emissions reductions from 2002 to 

2008, the State concluded the Coachella 

Valley met the ROP requirement for the 

15% VOC reduction. 

TABLE 5—15% RATE-OF-PROGRESS DEMONSTRATION FOR VOC EMISSIONS IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY a

VOC Emissions Coachella 

(tpsd) 

1. 2002 baseline inventory .................................................................................................................................................................. 22.7 

2. 2008 remaining emissions ............................................................................................................................................................... 17.6 

3. 2008 goal (remaining emissions after 15% ROP Reduction required from 2002 baseline) .......................................................... 19.3 

4. ROP reduction achieved by 2008 (Compare Line 2 to Line 7) ...................................................................................................... Yes 

aSource: 2014 SIP Update, Table C–1. 

2. Reasonable Further Progress 

a. Requirements 

CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) 

require plans for nonattainment areas to 

provide for RFP. RFP is defined in 

section 171(1) as ‘‘such annual 

incremental reductions in emissions of 

the relevant air pollutant as are required 

by this part or may reasonably be 

required by the Administrator for the 

purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable 

date.’’ CAA section 182(c)(2)(B) requires 

ozone nonattainment areas classified as 

serious or higher to submit no later than 

3 years after designation for the 8-hour 

ozone standards an RFP SIP providing 

for an average of 3% per year of VOC 

and/or NOX emissions reductions for (1) 

the 6-year period immediately following 

the baseline year; and (2) all remaining 

3-year periods after the first 6-year 

period out to the area’s attainment date. 

The RFP requirement is a continuing 

applicable requirement for the 

Coachella Valley under the EPA’s antibacksliding rules that apply once a 

standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4). 

CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for 

the substitution of NOX emission 

reductions in place of VOC reductions 

to meet the RFP requirements. 

According to the EPA’s NOX

Substitution Guidance,45 the 

substitution of NOX reductions for VOC 

reductions must be done on a 

percentage basis, rather than a straight 

ton-for-ton exchange. There are two 

steps for substituting NOX for VOC. 

First, an equivalency demonstration 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75775 

must show that the cumulative RFP 

emission reductions are consistent with 

the NOX and VOC emission reductions 

determined in the ozone attainment 

modeling demonstration. Second, 

specified reductions in NOX and VOC 

emissions should be accomplished in 

the interim period between the 2002 

base year and the attainment date, 

consistent with the continuous RFP 

emission reduction requirement. 

b. RFP Demonstration in the State 

Submittal 

The 2014 SIP Update contains 

emissions estimates for the baseline, 

milestone and attainment years, and 

additional discussion of the RFP 

demonstration. See page 5 and Table C– 

1 in Appendix C. Table 6 below shows 

data from the RFP demonstration, with 

additional rows based on information 

provided by CARB. The 2014 SIP 

Update uses NOX substitution beginning 

in milestone year 2014 to meet VOC 

emission targets. For the Coachella 

Valley, the State concluded that RFP 

demonstration meets the applicable 

requirements for each milestone year as 

well as the attainment year. 

TABLE 6—CALCULATION OF RFP DEMONSTRATIONS FOR COACHELLA VALLEY a

VOC Emission calculations (tpd) 2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018 

1. 2002 Baseline VOC ............................. 22.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

2. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments .................................................... n/a 1.1 1.5 1.8 1.9 2.0 

3. RACT Corrections ................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 

4. Adjusted 2002 baseline VOC inventory 

(2002 Baseline VOC¥Line 2¥Line 3) n/a 21.6 21.2 20.9 20.8 20.7 

5. RFP Commitment for VOC reductions 

from new measures .............................. n/a 0 0 0 0 0 

6. Future Year VOC with existing and 

proposed measures .............................. n/a 17.6 15.0 15.8 15.8 15.9 

7. Required VOC % change since previous milestone year, relative to 2002 n/a 15% 9% 9% 9% 3% 

8. Required VOC reduction from 2002 

adjusted baseline ................................. n/a 15% 24% 33% 42% 45% 

9. Target VOC Levels b ............................ n/a 18.4 16.4 14.7 13.3 12.8 

10. Apparent VOC Shortfall (Line 

6¥Line 9) ............................................. n/a ¥0.8 ¥1.3 1.2 2.6 3.2 

11. Apparent % VOC shortfall (Line 10 ÷ 

Line 4 .................................................... n/a ¥3.7% ¥6.4% 5.6% 12.7% 15.3% 

12. VOC shortfall previously provided by 

NOX substitution % (Line 13 of prior 

milestone year, or 0 if negative) .......... n/a 0 0 0 5.6% 12.7% 

13. Actual VOC shortfall (Line 11¥Line 

12) ........................................................ n/a ¥3.7% ¥6.4% 5.6% 7.1% 2.5% 

NOX Emission calculations (tpd) 2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018 

15. Baseline NOX inventory ..................... 43.3 31.0 23.8 c 22.0 c 18.9 c 17.8 

16. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments .............................................. n/a 1.6 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.3 

17. Adjusted 2002 baseline NOX inventory (Line 15 2002 baseline¥Line 16) n/a 41.7 41.3 41.1 41.0 40.9 

18. RFP commitment for NOX reductions 

from new measures .............................. n/a 0 0 0 0 0 

19. Calculated NOX creditable reductions 

since 2002 (Line 17¥Line 18) ............. n/a 41.7 41.3 41.1 41.0 40.9 

20. Change in NOX since 2002 (Line 

19¥Line 15) ......................................... n/a 10.6 17.5 19.1 22.1 23.1 

21. Calculated % NOX reductions since 

2002 (Line 20 ÷ Line 19) ...................... n/a 25.6% 42.3% 46.5% 53.9% 56.5% 

22. NOX previously used for VOC shortfall by NOX substitution % (from Line 

12) ........................................................ n/a 0 0 0 5.6% 12.7% 

23. NOX substitution needed for VOC 

shortfall % (Same as Line 13, or 0 if 

Line 9 < 0) ............................................ n/a 0.0% 0.0% 5.6% 7.1% 2.5% 

24. Forecasted % NOX reduction surplus 

(Line 21¥Line 22¥Line 23) ................ n/a 25.6% 42.3% 40.9% 41.2% 41.3% 

25. RFP achieved? .................................. n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

aSource: 2014 SIP Update, Table C–1. 

bTarget VOC levels for 2008 = (1¥Line 8) × (Line 4). In subsequent years, Target VOC = [(prior year Line 9 + prior year Line 2¥current year 

line 2) × (1¥current year line 7)]. cEstimated emissions include an additional 1 tpd safety margin for transportation conformity budget. 

Note: Because of rounding conventions, values in table may not reflect the exact calculated quantity from the underlying numbers. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75776 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

46Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress 

Toward Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality 

Standards for Ozone and Setting Transportation 

Conformity Budgets for Ventura County, Antelope 

Valley—Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, 

Eastern Kern County, Imperial County, Revised: 

February 27, 2008, Release Date: February 27, 2008. 

47Letter dated April 16, 2008 from Deborah 

Jordan to James Goldstene, California Air Resources 

Board, RE: Adequacy Status of Coachella Valley 8- 

hour Ozone Early Progress Plan Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets. 

48 2014 SIP Update, Table D–1. 

49See http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/ 

Amendment-1.aspx. 

3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP 

Demonstrations 

Based on our review of the ROP 

calculations in the 2014 SIP Update, 

summarized in Table 5 above, we 

conclude that the state has 

demonstrated that sufficient emission 

reductions have been achieved to meet 

the ROP requirements in 2008. And as 

shown in Table 6, the South Coast 2007 

8-hour Ozone SIP provides for RFP in 

each milestone year, consistent with 

applicable CAA requirements and EPA 

guidance. We therefore propose to 

approve the ROP and RFP 

demonstrations under sections 182(b)(1) 

and 182(c)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4). 

E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 

Transportation Conformity 

1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets 

CAA section 176(c) requires federal 

actions in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to conform to the 

goals of SIPs. This means that such 

actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute 

to violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen 

the severity of an existing violation, or 

(3) delay timely attainment of any 

NAAQS or any interim milestone. 

Actions that involve Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding 

or approval are subject to the EPA’s 

transportation conformity rule, which is 

codified in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. 

Under this rule, metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment 

and maintenance areas coordinate with 

state and local air quality and 

transportation agencies, the EPA, 

FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that an 

area’s RTP and transportation 

improvement programs (TIP) conform to 

the applicable SIP. This demonstration 

is typically done by showing that 

estimated emissions from existing and 

planned highway and transit systems 

are less than or equal to the motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or 

budgets) contained in the SIP. An 

attainment, RFP, or maintenance SIP 

establishes MVEBs for the attainment 

year, each required RFP year or last year 

of the maintenance plan, as appropriate. 

MVEBs are generally established for 

specific years and specific pollutants or 

precursors. Ozone attainment and RFP 

plans establish MVEBs for NOX and 

VOC. See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i). 

Before an MPO may use MVEBs in a 

submitted SIP, the EPA must first either 

determine that the MVEBs are adequate 

or approve the MVEBs. In order for us 

to find the MVEBs adequate and 

approvable, the submittal must meet the 

conformity adequacy requirements of 40 

CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5) and be 

approvable under all pertinent SIP 

requirements. To meet these 

requirements, the MVEBs must be 

consistent with the approvable 

attainment and RFP demonstrations and 

reflect all of the motor vehicle control 

measures contained in the attainment 

and RFP demonstrations. See 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more 

information on the transportation 

conformity requirements and applicable 

policies on MVEBs, please visit our 

transportation conformity Web site at: 

https://www.epa.gov/state-and-localtransportation. 

The EPA’s process for determining 

adequacy of a MVEB consists of four 

basic steps: (1) Providing public 

notification of a SIP submission; (2) 

providing the public the opportunity to 

comment on the MVEB during a public 

comment period and responding to any 

comments that are submitted; (3) 

reviewing the submitted SIP to 

determine if it meets the adequacy 

criteria; and, (4) making a finding of 

adequacy or inadequacy. See 40 CFR 

93.118. 

2. MVEBs in the Coachella Valley Ozone 

Plan 

The 2007 AQMP did not propose 

budgets for transportation conformity 

for the Coachella Valley. CARB 

submitted the 2008 Early Progress Plan, 

an amendment to the SIP, to establish 

MVEBs for many areas of California 

including the Coachella Valley.46 Using 

EMFAC2007 (the 2007 version of the 

EMissions FACtor model), CARB set the 

2012 MVEBs at 7 tpd for VOCs and 26 

tpd for NOX. We found the MVEB in the 

2008 Early Progress Plan for the 

Coachella Valley to be adequate for 

transportation conformity 

purposes.47 See 73 FR 25694 (April 16, 

2008). 

The 2014 SIP Update includes 

updated MVEBs.48 As noted in Section 

IV.B.2 of this notice, the MVEBs were 

estimated using EMFAC2011, and the 

latest planning assumptions from SCAG, 

including Amendment No. 1 to the 

2012–2035 Regional Transportation 

Plan and Amendment No. 13–4 to the 

Federal Transportation Improvement 

Program.49 The emissions estimate also 

includes off-model adjustments to 

EMFAC2011 to account for the 

Advanced Clean Car regulations 

adopted by CARB and included in the 

SIP. See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016). 

The MVEBs are the projected on-road 

mobile source VOC and NOX emissions 

in the Coachella Valley for baseline, 

milestone and attainment years. These 

budgets, shown in Table 7, include a 1 

tpd safety margin, as allowed by the 

conformity rule. See 40 CFR 93.124(a). 

TABLE 7—COACHELLA VALLEY MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS IN THE 2014 SIP UPDATE

[tpd, average summer weekday] a

NOX VOC 

2014 2017 2018 2014 2017 2018 

On-Road Inventory ................................... 14.79 11.39 10.74 3.72 3.07 2.93 

Safety Margin ........................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1 

MVEBs b ................................................... 16 13 12 5 5 4 

aSource: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix D, Table D–1. 

b Rounded up to the nearest ton. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75777 

50Although the 2014 SIP Update contained 

MVEBs for 2014, 2017, and 2018, MVEBs for 2014 

are no longer relevant for conformity analyses since 

that year has passed. 

51 632 F.3d. 584, at 596–597 (9th Cir. 2011), 

reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 

668, further amended February 13, 2012 (ruling 

additional TCMs are required whenever vehicle 

emissions are projected to be higher than they 

would have been had VMT not increased, even 

when aggregate vehicle emissions are actually 

decreasing). 

52Memorandum dated August 30 2012 from Karl 

Simon, Director, Transportation and Climate 

Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 

to Carl Edlund, Director, Multimedia Planning and 

Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah 

Jordan, Director, Air Division, EPA Region 9. 

3. Proposed Action on the Budgets 

As part of our review of the budgets’ 

approvability, we have evaluated the 

revised budgets using our adequacy 

criteria in 40 CFR 93.318(e)(4) and (5). 

We found that the 2017 and 2018 

budgets meet each adequacy criterion. 

We have completed our review of the 

2014 SIP Update and are proposing to 

approve the SIP’s attainment and RFP 

demonstrations. We have also reviewed 

the proposed budgets submitted with 

the 2014 SIP Update and have found 

that the 2017 and 2018 budgets are 

consistent with the attainment and RFP 

demonstrations, were based on control 

measures that have already been 

adopted and implemented, and meet all 

other applicable statutory and 

regulatory requirements including the 

adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) 

and (5). Therefore, we are proposing to 

approve the 2017 and 2018 budgets as 

shown in Table 7.50 Once these budgets 

are found adequate or are approved, the 

budgets for the 2008 early progress plan 

for 2012 will no longer be used in 

transportation conformity 

determinations. If finalized as proposed, 

the U.S. Department of Transportation 

and SCAG (the metropolitan planning 

organization for the area) would be 

required to use the new budgets in 

transportation conformity 

determinations. 

F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions 

Offset Demonstration 

1. Requirements for a VMT Emissions 

Offset Demonstration 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a 

state with areas classified as ‘‘Severe’’ or 

‘‘Extreme’’ to ‘‘submit a revision that 

identifies and adopts specific 

enforceable transportation control 

strategies (TCSs) and TCMs to offset any 

growth in emissions from growth in 

VMT or numbers of vehicle trips in such 

area.’’ Herein, we refer to the SIP 

requirement as the ‘‘VMT emissions 

offset requirement,’’ and the SIP 

revision intended to demonstrate 

compliance with the VMT emissions 

offset requirement as the ‘‘VMT 

emissions offset demonstration.’’ The 

VMT emissions offset requirement is a 

continuing applicable requirement for 

the Coachella Valley under the EPA’s 

anti-backsliding rules that apply once a 

standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also 

includes two additional elements 

requiring that the SIP include: (1) TCSs 

and TCMs as necessary to provide 

(along with other measures) the 

reductions needed to meet the 

applicable RFP requirement, and (2) 

include strategies and measures to the 

extent needed to demonstrate 

attainment. As noted above, the first 

element of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) 

requires that areas classified as ‘‘Severe’’ 

or ‘‘Extreme’’ submit a SIP revision that 

identifies and adopts TCSs and TCMs 

sufficient to offset any growth in 

emissions from growth in VMT or the 

number of vehicle trips. 

In response to the Court’s decision in 

Association of Irritated Residents v. 

EPA,51 we issued a memorandum titled 

Guidance on Implementing Clean Air 

Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation 

Control Measures and Transportation 

Control Strategies to Offset Growth in 

Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle 

Miles Travelled (August 2012 

Guidance).52 The August 2012 Guidance 

discusses the meaning of the terms TCSs 

and TCMs, and recommends that both 

TCSs and TCMs be included in the 

calculations made for the purpose of 

determining the degree to which any 

hypothetical growth in emissions due to 

growth in VMT should be offset. 

Generally, TCS is a broad term that 

encompasses many types of controls 

including, for example, motor vehicle 

emission limitations, I/M programs, 

alternative fuel programs, other 

technology-based measures, and TCMs, 

that would fit within the regulatory 

definition of ‘‘control strategy.’’ See, 

e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n). TCM is defined 

at 40 CFR 51.100(r) to mean ‘‘any 

measure that is directed toward 

reducing emissions of air pollutants 

from transportation sources,’’ including, 

but not limited to, measures listed in 

CAA section 108(f), and generally refers 

to programs intended to reduce the 

VMT, the number of vehicle trips, or 

traffic congestion, such as programs for 

improved public transit, designation of 

certain lanes for passenger buses and 

high-occupancy vehicles, trip reduction 

ordinances, and similar measures. 

The August 2012 guidance also 

explains how states may demonstrate 

that the VMT emissions offset 

requirement is satisfied in conformance 

with the Court’s ruling. It recommends 

states estimate emissions for the 

nonattainment area’s base year and the 

attainment year. One emission 

inventory is developed for the base year, 

and three different emissions inventory 

scenarios are developed for the 

attainment year. Two of these scenarios 

would represent hypothetical emissions 

scenarios that would provide the basis 

to identify the ‘‘growth in emissions’’ 

due solely to the growth in VMT, and 

one that would represent projected 

actual motor vehicle emissions after 

fully accounting for projected VMT 

growth and offsetting emissions 

reductions obtained by all creditable 

TCSs and TCMs. The August 2012 

guidance contains specific details on 

how states might conduct the 

calculations. 

The base year on-road VOC emissions 

inventory should be based on VMT in 

that year and it should reflect all 

enforceable TCSs and TCMs in place in 

the base year. This would include 

vehicle emissions standards, state and 

local control programs such as I/M 

programs or fuel rules, and any 

additional implemented TCSs and 

TCMs that were already required by or 

credited in the SIP as of the base year. 

The first of the emissions calculations 

for the attainment year would be based 

on the projected VMT and trips for that 

year, and assume that no new TCSs or 

TCMs beyond those already credited in 

the base year inventory have been put 

in place since the base year. This 

calculation demonstrates how emissions 

would hypothetically change if no new 

TCSs or TCMs were implemented, and 

VMT and trips were allowed to grow at 

the projected rate from the base year. 

This estimate would show the potential 

for an increase in emissions due solely 

to growth in VMT and trips, 

representing a no-action scenario. 

Emissions in the attainment year in this 

scenario may be lower than those in the 

base year due to fleet turnover to loweremitting vehicles. Emissions may also 

be higher if VMT and/or vehicle trips 

are projected to sufficiently increase in 

the attainment year. 

The second of the attainment year 

emissions calculations would also 

assume that no new TCSs or TCMs 

beyond those already credited have 

been put in place since the base year, 

but would also assume no growth in 

VMT and trips between the base year 

and attainment year. Like the no-action 

attainment year estimate described 

above, emissions in the attainment year 

may be lower than those in the base year 

due to fleet turnover, but the emissions 

would not be influenced by any growth 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75778 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

53More recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014 

as the model for estimating on-road emissions; 

however, that approval allowed the continued use 

of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 

77337. 

in VMT or trips. This emissions 

estimate, the VMT offset ceiling 

scenario, would reflect the maximum 

attainment emissions that should be 

allowed to occur under the statute as 

interpreted by the Court because it 

shows what would happen under a 

scenario in which no offsetting TCSs or 

TCMs have yet been put in place and 

VMT and trips are held constant during 

the period from the area’s base year to 

its attainment year. 

These two hypothetical status quo 

estimates are necessary steps in 

identifying target emission levels. These 

levels determine whether further TCMs 

or TCSs beyond those that have been 

adopted and implemented are needed to 

fully offset any increase in emissions 

due solely to VMT and vehicle trips 

identified in the no action scenario. 

The third calculation incorporates the 

emissions that are actually expected to 

occur in the area’s attainment year after 

taking into account reductions from all 

enforceable TCSs and TCMs that in 

reality were put in place after the 

baseline year. This estimate would be 

based on the VMT and trip levels 

expected to occur in the attainment year 

(i.e., the VMT and trip levels from the 

first estimate) and all of the TCSs and 

TCMs expected to be in place and for 

which the SIP will take credit in the 

area’s attainment year, including any 

TCMs and TCSs put in place since the 

base year. This represents the projected 

actual (attainment year) scenario. If this 

emissions estimate is less than or equal 

to the emissions ceiling that was 

established in the second of the 

attainment year calculations, the TCSs 

or TCMs for the attainment year would 

be sufficient to fully offset the identified 

hypothetical growth in emissions. 

If the projected actual attainment year 

emissions are greater than the VMT 

offset ceiling established in the second 

of the attainment year emissions 

calculations even after accounting for 

post-baseline year TCSs and TCMs, the 

state would need to adopt and 

implement additional TCSs or TCMs. To 

meet the VMT offset requirement of 

section 182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by 

the Court, the additional TCSs or TCMs 

would need to offset the growth in 

emissions and bring the actual 

emissions down to at least the same 

level as the attainment year VMT offset 

ceiling estimate. 

2. The Coachella Valley VMT Emissions 

Offset Demonstration 

The Coachella Valley VMT Offset 

demonstration is contained in Appendix 

E of the 2014 SIP Update. The State 

used EMFAC2011,53 an EPA-approved 

motor vehicle emissions model for 

California, to estimate on-road 

emissions. The model calculates 

emissions from two combustion 

processes (i.e., running exhaust and 

start exhaust) and four evaporative 

processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses, 

diurnal losses, and resting losses). It 

combines trip-based VMT data from the 

regional transportation planning 

agencies (i.e., SCAG), starts data based 

on household travel surveys, and 

vehicle population data from the 

California Department of Motor 

Vehicles. These sets of data are 

combined with corresponding emission 

rates to calculate emissions. 

Emissions from running exhaust, start 

exhaust, hot soak, and running losses 

are a function of how much a vehicle is 

driven. As such, emissions from these 

processes are directly related to VMT 

and vehicle trips, and the State included 

emissions from them in the calculations 

that provide the basis for the revised 

Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset 

demonstration. The 2014 SIP Update 

(see page E–3) did not include 

emissions from resting loss and diurnal 

loss processes in the analysis because 

such emissions are related to vehicle 

population, rather than VMT or vehicle 

trips, and thus are not part of ‘‘any 

growth in emissions from growth in 

vehicle miles traveled or numbers of 

vehicle trips in such area’’ (emphasis 

added) under CAA section 182(d)(1)(A). 

The VMT emissions offset 

demonstration also includes the 

previously described three different 

attainment year scenarios (i.e., no 

action, VMT offset ceiling, and 

projected actual) for 2018. The State’s 

selection of 2018 is appropriate given 

that the 2014 SIP Update demonstrates 

attainment by the applicable attainment 

date of June 15, 2019 based on the 2018 

controlled emissions inventory. Table 8 

summarizes the emissions estimate for 

the base year and the three scenarios 

discussed in Section IV.G.1.b. 

TABLE 8—VMT EMISSIONS OFFSET INVENTORY SCENARIOS AND RESULTS FOR 1997 8-HOUR OZONE STANDARDS a

Scenario 

VMT Starts Controls VOC 

Emissions 

Year 1000 miles/ 

day Year 1000/day Year tpd 

Base Year ................................................ 2002 10,293 2002 1,248 2002 8 

No Action ................................................. 2018 14,329 2018 10,640 2002 4 

VMT Offset Ceiling ................................... 2002 14,329 2002 7,935 2002 3 

Projected Actual ....................................... 2018 64,709 2018 10,640 2018 2 

aSource: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix E. 

For the base year scenario, CARB ran 

the EMFAC2011 model for the 2002 

base year using VMT and starts data 

corresponding to those years. As shown 

in Table 8, the 2014 SIP Update 

estimates Coachella Valley VOC 

emissions to be 8 tpd in 2002. 

For the no-action scenario, the State 

first identified the on-road motor 

vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs or 

TCMs) put in place since the base year 

and incorporated into EMFAC2011. 

Then, CARB ran EMFAC2011 with the 

VMT and starts data corresponding to 

the applicable attainment year (i.e., 

2018 for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standards) without the emissions 

reductions from the on-road motor 

vehicle control programs put in place 

after the base year. Thus, the no action 

scenario reflects the hypothetical VOC 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75779 

54The 2014 SIP Update states, ‘‘there are no 

TCMs in the SIP for the Coachella Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert because upwind emissions 

from the South Coast Air Basin and Ventura County 

largely influence air quality in both the Coachella 

Valley and Western Mojave Desert. TCMs have been 

implemented by the SCAG in those upwind areas.’’ 

(Appendix E, p. E–3) 

55Appendix E of the SIP Update contains a full 

list of the TCSs adopted by the state since 1990. 

56The offsetting VOC emissions reductions from 

the TCSs and TCMs put in place after the base year 

can be determined by subtracting the ‘‘projected 

actual’’ emissions estimates from the ‘‘no action’’ 

emissions estimates in table 8. For the purposes of 

the 8-hour ozone demonstration, the offsetting 

emissions reductions, 2 tpd (4 tpd minus 2 tpd), 

exceed the growth in emissions from growth in 

VMT and vehicle trips (1 tpd). 

emissions that would occur in the 

attainment year in the nonattainment 

area if CARB had not put in place any 

additional TCSs or TCMs after 2002. As 

shown in Table 8, CARB estimates no 

action VOC emissions for Coachella 

Valley to be 4 tpd in 2018. 

For the VMT offset ceiling scenario, 

the State ran the EMFAC2011 model for 

the attainment year but with VMT and 

starts data corresponding to base year 

values. Like the no- action scenario, the 

EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to 

reflect VOC emissions levels in the 

attainment year without the benefits of 

the on-road motor vehicle control 

programs implemented after the base 

year. Thus, the VMT offset ceiling 

scenario reflects hypothetical VOC 

emissions if the State had not put in 

place any TCSs or TCMs after the base 

year and if there had been no growth in 

VMT or vehicle trips between the base 

year and the attainment year. As shown 

in Table 8, CARB estimates VMT offset 

ceiling VOC emissions to be 3 tpd in 

2018. 

The hypothetical growth in emissions 

due to growth in VMT and trips can be 

determined from the difference between 

the VOC emissions estimates under the 

no action scenario and the 

corresponding estimate for the VMT 

offset ceiling scenario. Based on the 

values in Table 9, the hypothetical 

growth in emissions due to growth in 

VMT and trips in the Coachella Valley 

would have been 1 tpd (i.e., 4 tpd minus 

3 tpd) for the purposes of the revised 

VMT emissions offset demonstration for 

the 8-hour ozone standards. This 

hypothetical difference establishes the 

level of emissions caused by growth in 

VMT that need to be offset by the 

combination of post-baseline year TCMs 

and TCSs and any necessary additional 

TCMs and TCSs. 

For the projected actual scenario 

calculation, the State included the 

emissions benefits from TCSs and 

TCMs 54 put in place since the base year. 

The most significant State on-road and 

fuels measures providing reductions 

during the 2002 to 2018 timeframe and 

relied upon for the VMT emissions 

offset demonstration include Low 

Emission Vehicles II and Zero 

Emissions Vehicle standards, California 

Reformulated Gasoline Phase 3, and 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks. 

Some of these measures were adopted 

prior to 2002, but all or part of the 

implementation occurred after 2002.55

State measures adopted since 2007, as 

part of the 2009 State Strategy Status 

Report, and the associated reductions 

are also described in the IV.B.2.d of this 

notice. The 2014 SIP Update provides a 

list of CARB rules for mobile sources, 

since 1990 through the plan’s 

development, in Table E–4. 

3. The EPA’s Evaluation of the VMT 

Emissions Offset Demonstration 

The Coachella Valley VMT emissions 

offset demonstrations established 2002 

as the base year for the purpose of the 

VMT emissions offset demonstration for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. The 

base year for VMT emissions offset 

demonstration purposes should 

generally be the same base year used for 

nonattainment planning purposes. In 

today’s action, the EPA is proposing to 

approve the 2002 base year inventory 

for Coachella Valley for the purposes of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus, 

CARB’s selection of 2002 as the base 

year for the VMT emissions offset 

demonstration for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standards is appropriate. 

As shown in Table 8, the results from 

these calculations establish projected 

actual attainment-year VOC emissions 

of 2 tpd in the Coachella Valley for the 

1997 8-hour standards demonstration. 

By comparing these values against the 

corresponding VMT offset ceiling value, 

we can determine whether additional 

TCMs or TCSs would need to be 

adopted and implemented to offset any 

increase in emissions due solely to VMT 

and trips. Because the projected actual 

emissions are less than the 

corresponding VMT offset ceiling 

emissions, the State’s demonstration 

shows compliance with the VMT 

emissions offset requirement. This 

means that the adopted TCSs and TCMs 

are sufficient to offset the growth in 

emissions from the growth in VMT and 

vehicle trips in Coachella Valley for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standards. Taking 

into account the creditable post-baseline 

year TCMs and TCSs, the demonstration 

shows Coachella Valley offset 

hypothetical growth in emissions due to 

growth in VMT by 2 tpd of VOC, which 

is more than the required 1 tpd offset.56

Based on our review of the 2014 SIP 

Update, we find the State’s analysis to 

be acceptable and agree that the State 

has adopted sufficient TCSs and TCMs 

to offset the growth in emissions from 

growth in VMT and vehicle trips in the 

Coachella Valley for the purposes of the 

1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus we 

find that the VMT emissions offset 

demonstration for this area complies 

with the VMT emissions offset 

requirement in CAA section 

182(d)(1)(A), consistent with 40 CFR 40 

CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). 

Therefore, we propose approval of the 

revised VMT emissions offset 

demonstration for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standards, contained in the 2014 

SIP Update, as a revision to the 

California SIP. 

V. The EPA’s Proposed Actions 

A. The EPA’s Proposed Approvals 

For the reasons discussed above, the 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

Coachella Valley Ozone Plan for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Plan 

includes the relevant portions of the 

following documents: (1) ‘‘Final 2007 

Air Quality Management Plan,’’ South 

Coast Air Quality Management District, 

June 2007; (2) CARB’s ‘‘2007 State 

Strategy for the California State 

Implementation Plan,’’ Release Date 

April 26, 2007 and Appendices A–G, 

Release Date May 7, 2007; (3) CARB’s 

‘‘Status Report on the State Strategy for 

California’s 2007 State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) and Proposed Revision to the 

SIP Reflecting Implementation of the 

2007 State Strategy,’’ Release Date: 

March 24, 2009; (4) CARB’s ‘‘Progress 

Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State 

Implementation Plans (SIP) for the 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air 

Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,’’ 

Release Date March 29, 2011; and (5) 

CARB’s ‘‘Staff Report, Proposed Updates 

to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 

State Implementation Plans; Coachella 

Valley and Western Mojave Desert,’’ 

Release Date: September 22, 2014. 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

following elements of the Coachella 

Valley Ozone Plan under CAA section 

110(k)(3): 

1. The RACM demonstration as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17); 

2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations 

as meeting the requirements of CAA 

sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and 

40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4); 

3. The attainment demonstration as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12); 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
75780 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

4. The demonstration that the SIP 

provides for transportation control 

strategies and measures sufficient to 

offset any growth in emissions from 

growth in VMT or the number of vehicle 

trips, and to provide for RFP and 

attainment, as meeting the requirements 

of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 

51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). 

We are also approving the revised 

MVEBs for RFP for 2017 and for the 

attainment year of 2018, because they 

are derived from approvable RFP and 

attainment demonstrations and meet the 

requirements of CAA sections 176(c) 

and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. 

B. Request for Public Comments 

The EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document or on other relevant 

matters. We will accept comments from 

the public on this proposal for the next 

30 days. We will consider these 

comments before taking final action. 

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 not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because this action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

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 beyond those imposed by state 

law. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, will result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175, because the SIP 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, and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. The EPA believes that this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA lacks the discretionary 

authority to address environmental 

justice in this rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental 

regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: October 19, 2016. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–26376 Filed 10–31–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2016–0161; FRL–9954–59- 

Region 2] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants; New York, New Jersey and 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; Other 

Solid Wsate Incineration Units (OSWIs) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129 

negative declaration for the States of 

New York and New Jersey and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,for other 

solid waste incineration units(OSWIs) 

units. Other solid waste incineration 

(OSWI) unit means either a very small 

municipal waste combustion unit or an 

institutional waste incineration unit 

within our regulations. This negative 

declaration certifies that existing OSWI 

units subject to sections 111(d) and 129 

of the CAA do not exist within the 

jurisdiction of the Sates of New York 

and New Jersey or the Commonwealth 

of Puerto Rico. The EPA is accepting the 

negative declaration in accordance with 

the requirements of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 1, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02– 

OAR–2016—to http:// 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS