ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0140; FRL-____]

Revision to the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Portion of the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast 

Rule 1315

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed Rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 

to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the 

South Coast Air Quality Management District (District) portion 

of the California SIP. This SIP revision proposes to 

incorporate Rule 1315 – Federal New Source Review Tracking 

System - into the District’s SIP approved New Source Review 

(NSR) program to establish the procedures for demonstrating 

equivalency with federal offset requirements by specifying how 

the District will track debits and credits in its Offset 

Accounts for Federal NSR Equivalency for specific federal 

nonattainment pollutants and their precursors. The District’s 

SIP approved NSR program contained in Regulation XIII allows the 

District to exempt certain sources from obtaining offsetting 

emission reductions on the open market and for the District to 

provide offsets for designated sources that qualify, such as 

essential public services. EPA’s proposal to approve this SIP 
2

revision is based on finding that Rule 1315 provides an adequate 

system to demonstrate on an on-going basis that an equivalent 

amount of offsets are being provided pursuant to this rule as 

would otherwise be required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) and that 

the emission reductions the District is crediting and debiting 

in its Offset Accounts meet the requirements of the CAA and can 

be used to provide the offsets otherwise required for federal 

major sources and modifications.

DATES: Comments on this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) must 

be submitted no later than [insert date 30 days from date of 

publication in FR].

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-

OAR-2012-0140, by one of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions.

2. E-mail: r9airpermits@epa.gov.

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105-3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 

without change and may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
3

restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or 

otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

www.regulations.gov is an “anonymous access” system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and 

cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. 

While EPA generally lists the documents in the docket in the 

index, some information may not be specifically listed as a line 

item in the index or may be publicly available only at the hard 

copy location (e.g., voluminous records, copyrighted material), 

and some may not be publicly available in 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. The hard copy 

materials constitute the docket.
4

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, 

(415) 972-3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we”, “us”, 

and “our” refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background

II. Evaluation of SIP Revision

A. What is in the SIP Revision?

B. What Are the Federal Clean Air Act Requirements?

C. How Does the SIP Revision Comply with the Federal

Integrity Criteria and Demonstrate Equivalency?

D. Do Rule 1315’s Offsets Comply with the EPA’s Base Year 

Requirements?

E. CAA Section 110(l)

F. Public Comment and Final Action

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

EPA allows and encourages local authorities to tailor SIP 

programs, including new source review permitting programs, to 

account for that community’s particular needs provided that the 

SIP is not less stringent than the Act’s requirements. See 

generally CAA Section 116, 42 U.S.C. 7416; Train v. Natural Res. 

Defense Council, 421 U.S. 60, 79 (1975); Union Electric Co. v. 
5

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 250 (1976). The District’s nonattainment 

permitting rules contained in District Regulation XIII went 

through numerous public workshops and stakeholder meetings prior 

to adoption in December 1995. The California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) submitted Regulation XIII along with supporting 

regulations and documents to EPA Region 9 on August 28, 1996. 

On December 4, 1996, EPA Region 9 published a direct final 

approval of Regulation XIII in the Federal Register. 61 FR

64291 (December 4, 1996) (Codified at 40 CFR 52.220 

(c)(240)(i)(1)).

When EPA approved Regulation XIII, we noted that Rule 1304 

exempted certain major sources from obtaining offsets and Rule 

1309.1 allowed the District to provide offsets for specific 

“priority” projects. We approved these rules because the 

District committed to demonstrating on an annual basis that it 

was providing an amount of offsets that was equivalent to the

amount required to offset federal new and modified major 

sources.

1 EPA did not require the District to codify its 

internal NSR tracking system in rule language as a condition of 

full approval of Regulation XIII. From 1997 through 2005, the 

District submitted annual equivalency reports to its Board for 

 

1 Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX Air & Toxics Division Technical 

Support Document for EPA’s Notice of Final Rulemaking for the California 

State Implementation Plan South Coast Air Quality Management District New 

Source Review by Gerardo C. Rios, October 24, 1996 (TSD).
6

approval and provided copies to EPA Region 9.2 The District’s 

Board meetings at which the annual reports were approved were 

open to the public.

EPA informed the District beginning in 2002 that if it was 

significantly expanding the sources that were allowed to obtain 

offsets from the internal NSR tracking system through a new 

offset budget rule (Rule 1309.2 – Offset Budget), the tracking 

system’s transparency should be improved. Proposed SCAQMD NSR 

Offset Tracking System, Oct. 14, 2005, (2005 Proposed Tracking 

System) at p.1. In 2004-2005, the District drafted regulatory 

language, now revised and adopted as Rule 1315, to establish NSR 

program equivalency with the federal NSR offset requirements for 

major sources and demonstrate annually that the District 

provided sufficient offsets for federal major sources and 

modifications that were 1) otherwise exempt from offset 

requirements under Rule 1304 or 2) allocated offsets pursuant to 

Rule 1309.1. Proposed Rule 1315(a), Preliminary Draft, Adopted 

Sept. 8, 2006.

In our discussions during 2002-2003, EPA also noted that 

the District’s use of the negative NSR balances and other pre1990 era offsets to fund the NSR tracking system would be 

inconsistent with federal requirements unless the District had 

 

2 Annual Equivalency Reports approved by the South Coast AQMD Board, dated 

February 14, 1997, March 13, 1998, April 9, 1999, August 18, 2000, November 

9, 2001, August 2, 2002, and April 2, 2004.
7

sufficient records for those offsets. Staff Report: Proposed 

Rule 1315 – Federal New Source Review Tracking System, dated 

January 7, 2011, at pp. 6-7 (2011 Staff Report); 2005 Proposed 

Tracking System at pp. 1-2. The District concluded that it did 

not readily have sufficient documentation for many of the 

offsets it had collected from the negative NSR balances and 

other pre-1990 era offsets. Proposed SCAMQD NSR Offset Tracking 

System, Oct. 14, 2005 at p. 2.

The District responded to EPA’s request by eliminating any 

offsets originating before 1990 without documentation on October 

14, 2005. 2005 Proposed Tracking System, at pp. 12-13. Unlike 

many areas, the District requires almost all federal minor 

sources to obtain a permit and offset any emission increases up 

to the sources’ permitted emissions level. Rule 1303(b)(2).

The adjustments the District made in October 2005 to the 

existing NSR tracking system significantly decreased the balance

of available offsets for most pollutants. For example, this 

adjustment reduced the internal NSR tracking system balance for 

PM10 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 

or equal to 10 micrometers) by 92% (from 34.5 to 2.67 tons per 

day). 2011 Staff Report, at p. 9; 2005 Proposed Tracking 

System, at Table 1. The District informed EPA Region 9 that it 

had previously credited the offsets from minor orphan shutdowns 

for State purposes. The District had not needed to credit those 
8

minor orphan shutdowns for its federal accounts because the 

offsets from the negative NSR balances were far greater than the 

amount needed to demonstrate equivalency with federal offset 

requirements for Rule 1304 exempt sources and Rule 1309.1 

priority reserve sources. (2005 Proposed Tracking System), at 

p. 3.

EPA and the District had further discussions about the 

changes to the NSR tracking system resulting in a revised letter 

to EPA dated February 23, 2006. SCAQMD’s Revised NSR Offset 

Tracking System, Feb. 23, 2006. The revisions primarily 

resolved issues EPA raised regarding the District’s method of 

reporting the offset account balances and the remedy if a 

shortfall was projected. SCAQMD Letter from Dr. Barry 

Wallerstein to Deborah Jordan, Feb. 24, 2006. EPA responded by 

letter on April 11, 2006, indicating that the District’s 

proposed NSR Offset Tracking System funded with emission 

reductions from minor and major orphan shutdowns and other 

sources (i.e. credits to the system) appeared to be sufficient 

for EPA to propose approval of Rule 1315. EPA Letter from 

Deborah Jordan to Dr. Barry Wallerstein, April 11, 2006. Both 

the October 2005 Proposed SCAQMD NSR Offset Tracking System and 

February 23, 2006 Revised NSR Offset Tracking System appended 

tables prepared by the SCAQMD called the “Federal Running 

Balances.” Revised NSR Offset Tracking System, Feb. 23, 2006, 
9

Attachment 1. The Federal Running Balances table contains

details concerning the credits added and debits subtracted from 

the NSR offset tracking system. 

The District adopted Rule 1315’s regulatory language 

codifying how it will account for, or “track”, the emission 

reductions that it adds into its Offset Accounts as credits and 

those which it subtracts as debits to provide offsets for the 

construction of certain federal major sources or modifications

exempted from offset requirements pursuant to Rule 1304 or for 

which the District provided offsets pursuant to Rule 1309.1. 

SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution for the Re-adoption of Rule 

1315 – Federal New Source Review Tracking System, dated Feb. 4, 

2011. EPA is now proposing to approve Rule 1315 as a SIP 

revision. 

II. Evaluation of SIP Revision

A. What is in the SIP Revision?

Rule 1315 which the District, through CARB, submitted to 

EPA consists of the regulatory text the District adopted on 

February 4, 2011, along with supporting documentation including 

a Staff Report dated January 7, 2011. EPA received the SIP 

submittal for Rule 1315 from CARB on March 2, 2011, and a 

supplemental submittal on February 7, 2012. On March 25, 2011, 

we found that the submittal of District Rule 1315 met the 
10

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must 

be met before formal EPA review.

The Rule contains a section describing its purpose and a 

definitions section. Rule 1315(a) and (b). Rule 1315(c), 

Offset Accounts for Federal NSR Equivalency, contains provisions 

for quantifying, crediting and debiting the offset accounts. 

Rule 1315(c)(1), District Offset Accounts for Federal 

Nonattainment Air Contaminants, provides that all pre-1990 

offsets were removed at the end of 2005 and sets forth the 

initial District Offset Account Balances in Table A. Rule 

1315(c)(2) provides that the District shall debit its Offsets 

Accounts for emissions increases at federal new and modified 

major sources that are not required to provide Emission 

Reduction Credits (ERCs) based on Rules 1304 (Exemptions) and 

1309.1 (Priority Reserve). Rule 1315(c)(3)(A) contains a list 

of the emission reductions the District can add to its Offset 

Accounts and 1315(c)(3)(B) establishes how the District will 

quantify the actual emissions reductions for that list. Rule 

1315(c)(4) specifies how the District will discount each Offset 

Account annually to ensure the reductions will be surplus to all 

CAA requirements at the time an offset is used. Rule 1315(c)(5) 

specifies the steps the District will take to calculate annually 

a Preliminary Determination of Equivalence and Final 

Determination of Equivalence. In Rule 1315(c)(6), the District 
11

sets forth how the credits and debits meet each of the federal 

requirements for offsets. The remaining provisions in Rule 1315 

establish the methods for reporting the annual Preliminary and 

Final Equivalency demonstrations, projecting future Offset 

Account balances and methods to remedy any balance shortfalls. 

Rule 1315 provides that it will expire on January 1, 2031.

B. What Are the Federal Clean Air Act Requirements?

The South Coast Air Basin is an extreme nonattainment area

for ozone and a serious nonattainment area for PM10. The 

Coachella Valley Air Basin is a severe nonattainment area for 

ozone and a serious nonattainment area for PM10. Oxides of 

nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are both 

ozone precursors and are therefore treated as ozone

nonattainment pollutants. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions are 

PM10 precursors and are therefore also treated as a PM10

nonattainment pollutant. While the District is classified as 

nonattainment for PM2.5 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers) and portions of 

the District as nonattainment for lead, Rule 1315 does not apply 

to these pollutants. The District was redesignated to 

attainment for carbon monoxide (CO) on May 11, 2007 (72 FR 

26718), but CO is included in the tracking system because of its 

past nonattainment status. 
12

As required by CAA § 110(a)(2)(C), SIPs are required to 

include provisions to comply with CAA Part D for nonattainment 

pollutants. Among the Part D requirements, §173(a)(1)(A)

requires new and modified major stationary sources to provide 

offsetting emission reductions. Section 173(c) requires the 

offsetting emission reductions to be quantifiable, surplus, 

permanent, and enforceable. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(c)(i); 

40 CFR Part 51, Appendix S. This proposal will refer to those

requirements as the “federal integrity criteria”.

EPA is proposing to approve Rule 1315 because the rule

ensures that the emission reductions in the District’s Offset 

Accounts meet the federal integrity criteria. See Rule 1315(c). 

Rule 1315 also demonstrates that the District’s offset tracking 

system provides an equivalent quantity of offsets for those 

major sources and modifications that are not required to provide 

such offsets pursuant to District Rules 1304 and 1309.1. EPA’s 

analysis of how the credits and debits tracked in Rule 1315 meet 

the federal integrity criteria is summarized below and set forth 

in more detail in the Technical Support Document (TSD).

C. How Does the SIP Revision Comply with the Federal

Integrity Criteria and Demonstrate Equivalency?

1. The Offsets Credited and Debited through Rule 1315 Are 

Quantifiable.
13

EPA is proposing to approve Rule 1315 because the emission 

reductions that the District credits and debits to its Offset 

Accounts meet the requirement to be quantifiable emissions 

reductions. The District meets this requirement by 

demonstrating that the credits and debits are actual and 

quantifiable reductions of emissions. To quantify the 

reductions of emissions from orphan shutdown sources, the 

District determines the permitted emissions level and then 

applies an 80% actual emissions factor. Rule 1315(c)(3)(B)(i); 

Staff Report at p. 17 (“AQMD proposes to use an average discount 

factor to account for the difference between potential and 

actual emissions.”). The vast majority of emission reductions 

credited to the Offset Accounts are from orphan shutdowns, which 

occur when the owner/operator of a stationary source that has 

been shut down does not apply for an Emission Reduction Credit 

(ERC) under Rule 1309 (Emission Reduction Credits and Short Term 

Credits). Staff Report at p. 17. The information that is 

available to the District when a source is shut down and the 

operating permit is inactivated are the source’s permitted 

emissions, which represent its potential to emit rather than its 

actual emissions. Under Rule 1315, the District makes an 

adjustment to the permitted (i.e. potential) emissions by 

applying an 80% actual emissions factor before crediting these 
14

emissions to the Offset Accounts. See Rule 1315(c)(3)(B)(i); 

Staff Report at p. 17.

The District has justified its determination that reducing 

the permitted (i.e. potential) emissions by 20% and crediting 

the remaining 80% is an adequate representation of actual 

emissions based on several considerations. The District has 

historically implemented an 80% actual emissions factor for 

estimating actual emission reductions in its Regulation XIII 

annual reports following concurrence by the California Air 

Resources Board. Staff Report at 17. The District also

provided a Federal Reserve Statistical Release Report examining 

historical industrial production and capacity utilization. 

While certain short term cycles may reflect greater or lower 

utilization, the District’s justification for selecting an 80% 

factor over the long term is supported by this data. Id. The 

District’s method of quantifying actual emission reductions is 

also supported by the inherent structure of the District’s NSR

program. Every stationary source that is operated in the 

District with permitted emissions exceeding 4 tons per year 

(tpy) of ozone precursors or PM10 (including precursors) is 

required to obtain ERCs to offset the entire amount of its 

permitted emissions. The cost of obtaining the ERCs to offset 

permitted emissions provides “a strong incentive to keep [each 
15

source’s] potential emissions in line with actual emissions 

during times of high production”. Staff Report at 17. 

For exempt and priority reserve sources that obtain their 

offsets from the District, the District limits the amount of 

offsets provided by including permit conditions that limit 

operations to actual operating scenarios. The District has 

shown that fifty to eighty percent of the very small exempt 

sources (emitting < 4 tpy of most pollutants) have permits 

emissions limits that are less than one-half of the exemption 

threshold (i.e. permitted emissions are less than 2 tpy). Table 

5 of Staff Report, p 18. This information supports finding that 

the District is permitting sources at close to the source’s 

actual emissions and that an 80% actual emissions factor 

adequately reflects actual reductions from orphan shutdown 

sources. 

For the reasons provided by the District, EPA is proposing 

to approve Rule 1315 as ensuring that the emission reductions it 

credits to its Offset Accounts pursuant to Rule 1315(c)(3)(B)(i) 

meet the requirement to be actual emission reductions based on 

crediting only 80% of permitted emission levels.

2. The Offsets Credited and Debited through Rule 1315 are 

Surplus.

Rule 1315(c)(4) ensures that any offsets debited from the 

District Offset Accounts are properly adjusted to be surplus at 
16

the time they are used as required by the federal integrity 

criteria. Specifically, the rule requires that the balance of 

credits in the Offset Accounts for each pollutant be reduced 

annually to account for any newly adopted rules that control 

these pollutants, ensuring that the debits used as offsets are 

surplus at the time they are used. Rule 1315(c)(4) (providing 

that the District discount the Offset Account balances annually 

“based on the percentage reduction in overall permitted 

emissions projected to be achieved as a result of implementation 

of control requirements that became effective during the 

previous calendar year for each specific nonattainment 

contaminant within the District.”) EPA is proposing to find that 

Rule 1315 ensures that the offsets the District debits from its 

Offset Accounts meet the federal integrity criterion to be 

surplus.

3. The Offsets Debited from the District Offset Accounts 

are Permanent.

The emission reductions credited to the District’s Offset 

Accounts are all permanent reductions at the time they are 

credited to the accounts because the permit for the emission 

source has either been retired or revised to include conditions 

that limit the emissions to levels lower than they are otherwise 

required to be limited through the use of federally enforceable 

permit conditions. The debits are permanent because Rule 1315 
17

requires the District to subtract those offsets from the 

District’s Offset Account balances. Rule 1315(c)(5)(B). The

District must provide its Preliminary and Final Determinations 

of Equivalency annually to ensure there is a positive balance in 

each Offset Account. Rule 1315 also contains an equivalency 

backstop provision if any Offset Account has a shortfall. Rule 

1315(f). EPA is proposing to find that Rule 1315 assures that 

the emission reductions in the District’s Offset Accounts meet 

the requirement for permanent reductions.

4. The Offsets Credited and Debited from the District 

Offset Accounts are Enforceable.

The emission reductions credited to the District’s Offset

Accounts for orphan shutdowns or orphan reductions are all 

enforceable reductions at the time they are credited to the 

accounts because the permit for the emission source has either 

been retired, which means the source is no longer allowed to 

operate/emit those pollutants, or revised to include conditions 

that limit the emissions to levels lower than they are 

otherwise required to be limited through the use of federally 

enforceable permit conditions. This ensures that the emissions 

will be permanently retired or reduced. Rule 1315(b)(4) & (5) 

and (c)(3)(A)(i) & (ii). For each of the other types of credits 

listed in Rule 1315 (c)(3)(A), the credits are based on ERCs 

that have been generated pursuant to Rule 1309, which also 
18

requires that the emission reductions meet each of the federal 

integrity criterion, including the requirement to be enforceable 

emission reductions. Therefore, EPA is proposing to find Rule 

1315 meets the federal integrity criterion for enforceable 

reductions.

D. Do Rule 1315’s Offsets Comply with the EPA’s Base Year 

Requirements?

40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(i)(C) provides:

Emissions reductions achieved by shutting down an existing 

emission unit or curtailing production or operating hours 

may be generally credited for offsets if . . . .(ii)[t]he 

shutdown or curtailment occurred after the last day of the 

base year for the SIP planning process. For purposes of 

this paragraph, a reviewing authority may choose to 

consider a prior shutdown or curtailment to have occurred 

after the last day of the base year if the projected 

emissions inventory used to develop the attainment 

demonstration explicitly includes the emissions from such 

previously shutdown or curtailed emission units.

See also 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix S, IV.

Rule 1315 is being submitted by the District to demonstrate 

equivalency with the Part D requirements for ozone and PM10 (and 

their precursor emissions). To evaluate Rule 1315’s compliance 

with the base year requirement for using offsets from emissions 
19

units being shut down or curtailed, EPA has determined that the 

most appropriate attainment demonstrations to review are the 

District’s approved PM10 and 8-hour ozone Plans. Approval and 

Promulgation of [SIPs] for Air Quality Planning Purposes; 

California - South Coast and Coachella, 70 FR 69081 (Nov. 14, 

2005) (2003 Plan); Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 

California; South Coast; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-hour Ozone

Standards, EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0622 (Signed Dec. 15, 2011)(2007

Plan). The District’s PM10 Plan was adopted in 2003 and relies

on a 1997 base year emission inventory. 2003 Plans, Chapter 3 & 

Appendix III. For ozone, the Plan was adopted in 2007 and 

relies on a 2002 base year emission inventory. 2007 Plan, 

Chapter 3 & Appendix III.

In accordance with the base year requirements specified in 

40 CFR 51.165, the District estimated that 3.1 tons per day 

(tpd) of pre-2002 base year VOC emission reductions may be 

needed to satisfy offset demand. 2007 Plan Appendix III. For 

ozone precursors, the District added 27 and 2 tons per day for 

VOC and NOx, respectively, as growth.3 This amount includes the 

3.1 tpd of pre-2002 base year VOC emission reductions. While 

this is not the total amount of pre-2002 base year emission 

 

3 See 2007 Plan Appendix III, pgs 28-34, Tables 2-8 and 2-12. For Table 2.8, 

the District provided EPA with the point and area source data used to 

generate the summary data. EPA used this data to determine the amount of 

emission due to growth at facilities subject to NSR offset requirements. 
20

reductions available as debits pursuant to Rule 1315, the 

District has demonstrated that this amount represents the 

highest amount of pre-2002 credits that are expected to be used 

as offsets prior to attainment of the ozone standard. 2007 Plan 

Appendix III, pgs 28-34. The District used a similar approach 

for the 2003 Plan as it pertains to PM10 and SOx emissions. See 

the TSD for additional details. This approach is consistent 

with EPA guidance that states must include pre-base year credits 

to the “extent that the State expects that such credits will be 

used for offsets...”. 57 FR 13498 

Therefore, even if the District Offset Accounts rely on 

pre-base year emission reductions as offsets, the District’s 

Plans have adequately added pre-base year emissions explicitly 

into the appropriate projected planning inventories. For these 

reasons, EPA is proposing to approve Rule 1315.

E. CAA Section 110(l)

Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA may not approve any 

SIP revision that would interfere with attainment, reasonable 

further progress (RFP) or any other CAA requirement. EPA’s 

incorporation of Rule 1315 into the SIP will not interfere with 

attainment or RFP because the rule provides a regulatory 

mechanism setting forth the internal offset accounting system 

that the District has been relying on. In addition, the 

District does not rely on the offsets in the District’s Offset 
21

Accounts for attainment or RFP in the District’s most recent 

attainment demonstrations for ozone or PM10. 

This SIP revision also does not interfere with any other 

CAA requirement. Rule 1315 provides regulatory language 

detailing how the District will quantify and add credits and 

subtract debits from its Offset Accounts. Our proposal to 

approve Rule l315 is based on finding the rule ensures the 

credits and debits meet the federal integrity criteria and that 

the District system overall is equivalent to the requirements of 

Section 173. 

F. Public Comment and Final Action

Because EPA has determined Rule 1315 fulfills all relevant 

requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described 

in section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from 

the public on this proposal for the next 30 days. After 

considering the information and views submitted to us during the 

comment period, we will take final action on this SIP submittal.

Rule 1315 has been under development at the District and 

the interested public has been involved in its development for 

the last several years, including state litigation concerning 

the Rule. Therefore, EPA does not anticipate extending the 

public comment period beyond 30 days absent extraordinary or 

compelling circumstances. 
22

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to 

approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of 

the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role 

is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the 

criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and 

does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. For that reason, this proposed action:

• is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review 

by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• does not impose an information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.);

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
23

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significant regulatory action based 

on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those 

requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 

address disproportionate human health or environmental 

effects with practical, appropriate, and legally 

permissible methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 

7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will 
Environmental protection, Air pollution control,

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

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

Dated: ,C%red Blumenfeld,