63408 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

1The area referred to as ‘‘Los Angles-South Coast 

Air Basin’’ (South Coast Air Basin or ‘‘South 

Coast’’) includes Orange County, the southwestern 

two-thirds of Los Angeles County, southwestern 

San Bernardino County, and western Riverside 

County. For a precise description of the boundaries 

of the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, see 40 

CFR 81.305. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2008–0677; FRL–8734–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

California; 2003 State Strategy and 

2003 South Coast Plan for One-Hour 

Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

one state implementation plan (SIP) 

revision, and to approve in part and to 

disapprove in part a second SIP 

revision, submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board to provide for 

attainment of the one-hour ozone 

standard and maintenance of the 

nitrogen dioxide standard in the Los 

Angeles-South Coast Air Basin. The two 

SIP revisions include the 2003 State 

Strategy and the 2003 South Coast SIP, 

both of which were submitted on 

January 9, 2004. 

With respect to the 2003 State 

Strategy, EPA is proposing to approve 

the commitment by the State to develop 

and propose near-term defined 

measures sufficient to achieve specific 

emissions reductions in the South Coast 

and to continue implementation of an 

existing measure. With respect to the 

2003 South Coast SIP, EPA is proposing 

to approve certain elements, and to 

disapprove other elements. The plan 

elements that are proposed for 

disapproval are not required under the 

Clean Air Act because they represent 

revisions to previously-approved SIP 

elements, and thus, the disapprovals 

will not affect the requirements for the 

State to have an approved SIP for these 

SIP elements. Therefore, the 

disapprovals, if finalized, would not 

trigger sanctions clocks nor EPA’s 

obligation to promulgate a Federal 

implementation plan. 

EPA is proposing these actions under 

provisions of the Clean Air Act 

regarding EPA action on SIP submittals 

and plan requirements for 

nonattainment areas. 

DATE: Any comments must arrive by 

November 24, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2008–0677, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions. 

• E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Marty Robin, Office 

of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105. 

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 

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 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 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 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR– 

2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, (520) 622–1622, 

tax.wienke@epa.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action 

II. Background 

A. Introduction 

B. 1994 South Coast Ozone SIP and State 

Strategy 

C. 1999 State Update to the South Coast 

Ozone SIP 

D. 1997 South Coast AQMP and 1997/1999 

South Coast Ozone SIP 

E. 2003 State Strategy 

F. 2003 South Coast SIP 

III. Review of the 2003 State Strategy and 

2003 South Coast SIP 

A. Procedural Requirements 

B. Base Year and Projected Baseline 

Emissions Inventory 

C. Control Measures and Contingency 

Measures 

1. State’s Defined Measures 

2. District’s Near-Term Control Measures, 

Annual Emissions Reductions 

Commitment, and Contingency Measure 

3. District’s Black Box Emissions 

Reduction Commitment 

4. Black Box Emissions Reduction 

Assignment to the Federal Government 

D. Attainment Demonstration 

E. Quantitative Milestones and Reasonable 

Further Progress (RFP) 

F. Transportation Control Measures To 

Offset Growth in Motor Vehicle 

Emissions 

G. Nitrogen Dioxide Maintenance 

Demonstration 

H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEBs) 

IV. Public Comment and Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action 

In today’s action, under the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’), we are proposing 

to approve one state implementation 

plan (SIP) revision, and to approve in 

part and to disapprove in part, a second 

SIP revision, submitted by the California 

Air Resources Board (ARB) to provide 

for attainment of the one-hour ozone 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS) and for maintenance of the 

nitrogen dioxide NAAQS in the Los 

Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area 

(South Coast).1 The two SIP revisions 

include the Final 2003 State and Federal 

Strategy (‘‘2003 State Strategy’’) and the 

2003 revisions to the SIP for ozone and 

nitrogen dioxide in the South Coast Air 

Basin (‘‘2003 South Coast SIP’’), both of 

which were submitted by ARB on 

January 9, 2004. These SIP revisions 

were developed in recognition of a need 

for additional emissions reductions to 

attain the one-hour ozone NAAQS than 

had been planned for in the late 1990s, 

and to establish new motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 

transportation conformity. 

With respect to the 2003 State 

Strategy, we are proposing to approve 

the commitments by ARB to develop 

and propose for adoption 15 near-term 

defined control measures, and the 

commitment by the California Bureau of 

Automotive Repair to develop and 

propose one near-term defined control 

measure sufficient to achieve specified 

emissions reductions in the South 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63409 

2 ‘‘Black box’’ commitment refers to the 

provisions under CAA section 182(e)(5) that 

anticipate development of new control techniques 

or improvement of existing control technologies. 

3California plans sometimes use the term 

Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) for VOC. These terms 

are essentially synonymous. For the sake of 

simplicity, we use the term VOC herein to mean 

either VOC or ROG. 

4For the 1-hour ozone standard, the expected 

number of exceedances refers to the number of days 

per calendar year with maximum hourly average 

concentrations above 0.12 ppm averaged over a 

three-year period. The standard is attained in an 

area when the expected number of exceedances is 

equal to or less than 1 at all stations. The design 

value for an area, which characterizes the severity 

of the air quality problem, is represented by the 

highest design value at any individual ozone 

monitoring site (i.e., the highest of the fourth 

highest 1-hour daily maximums in a given threeyear period with complete monitoring data). 

5The air quality design value for the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS is the 3-year average of the annual 

fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentration. 

6We approved some of the State and District 

measures in the plan earlier. See particularly 60 FR 

43379 (August 21, 1995). 

Coast. We are also proposing to approve 

the continuation of the existing SIP 

pesticide strategy assigned to the 

California Department of Pesticide 

Regulation. 

With respect to the 2003 South Coast 

SIP, we are proposing to approve the 

base year and projected baseline 

emissions inventories, the South Coast 

Air Quality Management District’s 

(District’s or SCAQMD’s) commitment 

to adopt and implement near-term 

stationary and mobile source control 

measures (with the exception of ‘‘FSS– 

05—Mitigation Fee Program for Federal 

Sources’’) and commitment to achieve 

aggregate emission reductions through a 

schedule of rule adoption and 

implementation, the District’s 

contingency measure (‘‘CTY–01— 

Accelerated Implementation of Control 

Measures’’), the District’s ‘‘black box’’ 

emission reduction commitment,2 the 

vehicle emissions offset demonstration, 

and the nitrogen dioxide maintenance 

demonstration and related motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs). 

Also, in connection with the 2003 

South Coast SIP, we are proposing to 

disapprove the District commitment to 

adopt one particular control measure 

(‘‘FSS–05—Mitigation Fee Program for 

Federal Sources’’); the ‘‘black box’’ 

emissions reduction assignment to EPA; 

the revised rate-of-progress and 

attainment demonstrations; and the 

ozone MVEBs. 

The primary rationale for proposing 

approval of certain control measures 

and the specific SIP elements described 

above is that they would strengthen the 

SIP by adding to, or updating, SIP 

elements previously approved by EPA. 

The reasons for proposing disapproval 

of the other specified elements of the 

2003 South Coast SIP include incorrect 

rate-of-progress calculation methods 

and the withdrawal by ARB of the state 

emissions reductions commitments in 

the 2003 State Strategy that were relied 

upon in the 2003 South Coast SIP. No 

sanctions clocks or Federal 

implementation plan (FIP) requirement 

would be triggered by our disapprovals, 

if finalized, because the plan revisions 

that are the subject of the proposed 

disapprovals represent revisions to 

previously-approved SIP elements that 

EPA determined met the CAA 

requirements, and thus, the revisions 

are not required under the Clean Air 

Act. 

II. Background 

A. Introduction 

Ground-level ozone is formed when 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), volatile 

organic compounds (VOC), and oxygen 

react in the presence of sunlight, 

generally at elevated temperatures.3

Strategies for reducing smog typically 

require reductions in both VOC and 

NOX emissions. 

Ozone causes serious health problems 

by damaging lung tissue and sensitizing 

the lungs to other irritants. When 

inhaled, even at very low levels, ozone 

can cause acute respiratory problems; 

aggravate asthma; cause temporary 

decreases in lung capacity of 15 to 20 

percent in healthy adults, cause 

inflammation of lung tissue, lead to 

hospital admissions and emergency 

room visits; and impair the body’s 

immune system defenses, making 

people more susceptible to respiratory 

illnesses, including bronchitis and 

pneumonia. Children are most at risk 

from exposure to ozone because they 

breathe more air per pound of body 

weight than adults; their respiratory 

systems are still developing and thus 

more susceptible to environmental 

threats; and children exercise outdoors 

more than adults in the high-ozone 

months of summer. 

In 1979, under section 109 of the 

CAA, EPA established a primary, 

health-based NAAQS for ozone: 0.12 

parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 

1-hour period. See 44 FR 8220 (February 

9, 1979). In 1997, EPA revised the ozone 

NAAQS by establishing an 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS of 0.08 ppm. See 62 FR 38856 

(July 18, 1997). Since submittal of the 

2003 State Strategy and 2003 South 

Coast SIP, EPA has revoked the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 2005, 

see 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004), and 

tightened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 

0.075 ppm, see 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 

2008). The nitrogen dioxide NAAQS is 

0.053 ppm, annual average. See 40 CFR 

50.11. 

Despite significant progress over the 

years, ozone concentrations in the South 

Coast continue to be the highest in the 

country. Over the 2005–2007 period, the 

expected number of exceedances 

relative to the now-revoked 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS is 13.3 days per year (at 

the Crestline monitor), and the design 

value is 0.164 ppm (at Crestline).4 With 

respect to the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

over the same period, the design value 

is 0.122 ppm.5 In contrast to ozone, 

concentrations of nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2) in the South Coast continue to be 

well below the NO2 NAAQS. For 

instance, in 2005, the highest annual 

concentrations measured in the South 

Coast were less the 60 percent of the 

nitrogen dioxide NAAQS based on data 

reported in the 2007 South Coast Air 

Quality Management District (AQMP) 

(June 2007). 

B. 1994 South Coast Ozone SIP and 

State Strategy 

The CAA was substantially amended 

in 1990 to establish new planning 

requirements and attainment deadlines 

for the NAAQS, including 1-hour ozone. 

Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the Act, 

areas designated nonattainment prior to 

enactment of the 1990 amendments, 

including the South Coast, were 

designated nonattainment by operation 

of law. The South Coast was classified 

as extreme nonattainment for 1-hour 

ozone, with an attainment deadline no 

later than November 15, 2010. The 

South Coast was also designated as 

‘‘nonattainment’’ for nitrogen dioxide, 

respirable particulate matter (PM10), and 

carbon monoxide (CO). 

The District adopted an ozone plan on 

September 9, 1994, as part of the 1994 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

Plan (‘‘1994 South Coast AQMP’’). ARB 

supplemented the District plan with 

State measures and submitted it as a 

revision to the California SIP on 

November 15, 1994. On July 10, 1996, 

ARB submitted an extensive revision to 

the South Coast control measure 

adoption schedule to adjust for slippage 

in the plan’s initial implementation. On 

January 8, 1997 (62 FR 1150), we 

finalized approval of the South Coast 

ozone plan, including the ozone 

portions of the 1994 South Coast AQMP, 

as amended in 1996, and the State 

measures (‘‘1994 Ozone SIP’’).6 The 

plan also contained ‘‘Federal measures,’’ 

which the State wished us to adopt and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
63410 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

7 In response to this assignment, we established 

a Public Consultative Process to identify the best 

options for achieving further emissions reductions 

from mobile source controls, at least to the extent 

they are needed for attainment of the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS in the South Coast. In connection with the 

establishment of this process, both EPA and ARB 

made commitments regarding appropriate future 

emissions reductions. Please see EPA’s final 

approval of the 1994 ozone SIP for a discussion of 

the ‘‘Federal measures,’’ and our rationale, at that 

time, for establishing the Public Consultative 

Process (62 FR 1152–5, 1184–6). 

8ARB’s annual adoption commitment represents 

a commitment to adopt and implement near-term 

measures to achieve, at a minimum, the VOC and 

NOX emissions reductions in tpd in the South Coast 

in 2010. Each year from 2003 through 2006 has a 

separate adoption commitment for VOC and NOX. 

For example, ARB’s commitment for 2003 is to 

adopt near-term measures in that year that in the 

aggregate achieve at least 10 tpd VOC and 11 tpd 

NOX emissions reductions in 2010 in the South 

Coast. Under this commitment, reductions in excess 

of the minimum commitment for a given year may 

be applied to the commitment for subsequent years. 

9The range is based on how much of the 97 tpd 

commitment is achieved from VOC versus NOX, 

and EPA action on a Federal emissions reduction 

assignment in the 2003 South Coast AQMP for 18 

tpd VOC and 68 tpd NOX by 2010. 

10 In ARB’s February 13, 2008 letter, ARB 

indicated that it was withdrawing the Commitment 

to Reduce Emissions via Adoption Schedule for the 

South Coast Air Basin outlined in Section I.D.1, 

Table I–6 of the Proposed 2003 State and Federal 

Strategy for the California SIP (released August 25, 

2003); however, in adopting the 2003 State Strategy, 

the ARB Board (via Resolution 03–22) modified the 

commitment by increasing the total related 

emissions reduction commitment to a total of 50 

tpd VOC and 59 tpd NOX in the South Coast in 

2010. See table A–5 of attachment A to ARB 

Resolution 03–22. ARB clarified, in a letter dated 

October 14, 2008, that the reference in the February 

13th letter was in error and that it intended to 

withdraw the commitment to reduce emissions via 

adoption schedule for the South Coast as modified 

in Resolution 03–22. 

implement in order to reduce emissions 

from mobile sources.7

C. 1999 State Update to the South Coast 

Ozone SIP 

On July 23, 1999 (64 FR 39923), we 

approved an update to the South Coast 

portion of the 1994 Ozone SIP, reporting 

on implementation of ARB’s control 

measures in the 1994 SIP and the 

contribution from Federal mobile source 

controls undertaken as part of the Public 

Consultative Process. We also updated 

our own commitment and approved a 

new ARB commitment to adopt by 

December 31, 2001, control measures 

needed to achieve any additional 

reductions which were determined to be 

appropriate for ARB. Please consult the 

final approval document and our 

proposed approval (64 FR 30276, June 7, 

1999) for more details on the update, the 

‘‘Federal measures,’’ and the Public 

Consultative Process on national mobile 

source measures. 

D. 1997 South Coast AQMP and the 

1997/1999 South Coast Ozone SIP 

The South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD, or 

‘‘District’’) adopted a completely revised 

plan on November 8, 1996 (‘‘1997 South 

Coast AQMP’’), and ARB submitted the 

revision on February 5, 1997. The 1997 

South Coast AQMP was not federally 

required for ozone, but was adopted by 

the District to address, in a 

comprehensive fashion, Federal and 

State requirements for particulate 

matter, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen 

dioxide, and State requirements for an 

ozone plan update. The 1997 South 

Coast AQMP revised the emissions 

inventory, modeling, and local control 

commitments in the attainment 

demonstration, but did not revise the 

State SIP commitments adopted in the 

1994 Ozone SIP. The 1997 South Coast 

AQMP included a maintenance plan 

and redesignation request for the 

nitrogen dioxide NAAQS, and EPA 

approved the plan and redesignation 

request in 1998. See 63 FR 39747 (July 

24, 1998). 

The District amended the ozone 

portion of the 1997 South Coast AQMP 

on December 10, 1999 (‘‘1999 South 

Coast AQMP Ozone Amendment’’), and 

ARB submitted the plan to us on 

February 4, 2000. We approved the 

ozone portion of the 1997 South Coast 

AQMP, as amended in 1999, on April 

10, 2000 (65 FR 18903), and refer to the 

amended plan as the 1997/1999 South 

Coast Ozone SIP. 

Specifically, in our April 2000 final 

rule, we approved the baseline and 

projected emissions inventories and 

attainment demonstration as contained 

in the 1997 South Coast AQMP, and we 

approved the following elements in the 

1999 South Coast AQMP Ozone 

Amendment: District commitments to 

adopt and implement near-term and 

intermediate-term control measures; the 

District’s commitment to adopt and 

implement ‘‘black box’’ control 

measures; the District’s commitment to 

achieve overall emissions reductions for 

the years 1999–2008; the District’s 

commitment to implement those 

measures that had been adopted in 

regulatory form between 1994 and 1999; 

the rate-of-progress plan for the 1999, 

2002, 2005, 2008 and 2010 milestone 

years; the amendment to the attainment 

demonstration in the 1997 South Coast 

AQMP for ozone; and the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets. Upon the effective 

date of our approval of the 1997/1999 

South Coast Ozone SIP, this plan 

replaced and superseded the 1994 

Ozone SIP for the South Coast Air Basin 

with the exception of the State control 

measures for mobile sources, consumer 

products, and pesticides, and EPA’s 

commitment to take part in the Public 

Consultative Process as discussed in the 

previous section of this document. 

E. 2003 State Strategy 

On October 23, 2003, ARB adopted 

the Final 2003 State and Federal 

Strategy for the California SIP (‘‘2003 

State Strategy’’). The 2003 State Strategy 

consists of the Proposed 2003 State and 

Federal Strategy for the California SIP 

(released August 25, 2003), as modified 

by ARB in the resolution approving the 

strategy. The modifications to the 

proposed strategy are set forth in 

attachment A to ARB Board Resolution 

03–22. The 2003 State Strategy 

identifies ARB’s regulatory agenda to 

reduce ozone and particulate matter in 

California by 2010 and was submitted to 

update and replace the State’s control 

measure commitments in the 1994 

Ozone SIP, as modified in 1999 for the 

South Coast. 

As submitted, the 2003 State Strategy 

includes four components affecting the 

South Coast: (1) State agency 

commitments to pursue 20 new defined 

near-term control measures to reduce 

emissions from mobile sources and 

consumer products, and to continue 

implementation of the existing SIP 

commitment to reduce VOC emissions 

from pesticide use; (2) State agency 

annual adoption commitments to 

achieve at least 50 tons per day (tpd) 

VOC and 59 tpd NOX emissions 

reduction in the South Coast in 2010 

from these or other near-term 

measures; 8 (3) ARB commitment to 

identify and adopt strategies by 2008 to 

achieve an additional 97 tpd combined 

VOC and NOX reductions in the South 

Coast through, in part, the evaluation of 

21 additional control concepts between 

2004–2006 and adoption of those found 

to be feasible as SIP measures on a 

specified schedule; and (4) ARB’s 

‘‘black box’’ commitment to reduce 

emissions in the South Coast by 118– 

233 tpd of VOC and 0–159 tpd of NOX

by 2010 for ‘‘black box’’ emissions 

reductions.9 ARB submitted the 2003 

State Strategy to us on January 9, 2004. 

On February 18, 2004, EPA found the 

2003 State Strategy to be complete. 

By letter dated February 13, 2008, 

ARB withdrew certain elements of the 

2003 State Strategy that relate to the 

South Coast. Specifically, ARB 

withdrew four specific defined nearterm measures, the State agency annual 

adoption commitments described 

above,10 the ARB commitment to 

identify and adopt strategies by 2008 to 

achieve an additional 97 tpd combined 

VOC and NOX reductions in the South 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63411 

11We interpret ARB’s withdrawal of the 97 tpd 

combined VOC plus NOX element of the long-term 

strategy for the South Coast to include withdrawal 

of the commitment to evaluate the feasibility of 21 

concepts for adoption as SIP measures listed in 

attachment A–1 to ARB Resolution 03–22. 

12Certain other components of the 2003 State 

Strategy relate to the San Joaquin Valley, and were 

proposed for action in a separate rulemaking. 

13By letter dated October 14, 2008, ARB 

withdrew the TCM portion of the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP. 

14The principal purpose, other than updating the 

CO portion of the 1997 South Coast AQMP, for 

developing and submitting the CO portion of the 

2003 South Coast SIP was to provide the basis for 

a CO maintenance plan. See page 10 of the District’s 

Carbon Monoxide Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan (February 2005) (‘‘2005 CO 

Maintenance Plan’’). That purpose has already been 

served by virtue of our approval of the 2005 CO 

Maintenance Plan in May 2007. Also, we note that 

the 2005 CO Maintenance Plan, which we have now 

approved, carries forward emissions estimates and 

projections, and a modeled attainment 

demonstration, from the 2003 South Coast AQMP 

as further evidence of the supersession of the CO 

portion of the 2003 South Coast AQMP. 

Coast,11 and ARB’s ‘‘black box’’ 

commitment described above. For the 

South Coast, the remaining component 

of the 2003 State Strategy is the State 

agency commitments to pursue 16 new 

defined near-term control measures (and 

to continue implementation of the 

existing SIP commitment to reduce VOC 

emissions from pesticide use).12 We are 

addressing the remaining commitments 

for the South Coast in the 2003 State 

Strategy in today’s action. 

F. 2003 South Coast SIP 

On August 1, 2003, the District 

approved the 2003 South Coast Air 

Quality Management Plan and 

submitted the final plan (‘‘2003 South 

Coast AQMP’’) to ARB on October 15, 

2003. The 2003 South Coast AQMP 

includes revisions to the 1997 South 

Coast AQMP for PM10, CO, and NO2, 

and revisions to the 1997/1999 South 

Coast Ozone SIP. Specifically, with 

respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the 

2003 South Coast AQMP updates the 

emissions inventories, the local control 

measure element, including the 

transportation control measures (TCMs) 

element,13 the ROP and attainment 

demonstrations, and the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets. With respect to NO2, 

the 2003 South Coast AQMP updates 

the maintenance plan and related motor 

vehicle emissions budget. The ozone 

portion of the 2003 South Coast AQMP 

relies on emission reduction 

commitments in the 2003 State Strategy, 

described above, and assigns the Federal 

Government the responsibility of 

achieving 18 tpd VOC and 68 tpd NOX

by 2010 in the South Coast, as the 

Federal Government’s share of the 

‘‘black box’’ strategy. 

The 2003 South Coast AQMP includes 

a primary attainment strategy (option 1) 

that sets emission targets based on 

reductions from local, State, and Federal 

elements but also includes an 

alternative strategy (option 2) that 

excludes reductions from Federal 

sources and modifies the attainment 

emission targets if EPA does not accept 

the District’s primary attainment 

strategy. Under option 2, the 2003 South 

Coast AQMP relaxes the NOX control 

target by 68 tpd NOX and assigns the 18 

tpd (assigned to the Federal Government 

under option 1) to ARB. 

On October 23, 2003, ARB adopted 

the 2003 South Coast AQMP, as 

modified in ARB Resolution 03–23 

(‘‘2003 South Coast SIP’’). In Resolution 

03–23, ARB adopted a modified version 

of ‘‘option 1’’ by adopting a backstop 

whereby, if EPA were to find the 

Federal assignment unacceptable, the 

ARB obligates itself to cover the related 

18 tpd VOC and 68 tpd NOX emissions 

reductions as part of its ‘‘black box’’ 

commitment. In Resolution 03–23, ARB 

also rejected one contingency measure 

included in the AQMP (CTY–04— 

‘‘Enhanced Oxygenated Fuels Content’’), 

and modified the VOC and NOX MVEBs. 

On January 9, 2004, ARB submitted 

the 2003 South Coast SIP. On February 

18, 2004, EPA found the 2003 South 

Coast AQMP to be complete. On March 

11, 2004, we found the MVEBs in the 

2003 South Coast SIP adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes. See 

69 FR 15325 (March 25, 2004). Since 

then, the CO budgets in the 2003 South 

Coast SIP have been superseded by final 

EPA approval of the 2005 South Coast 

CO Maintenance Plan (discussed 

below), and the ozone budgets have 

been superseded by EPA’s adequacy 

determination on 8-hour ozone budgets 

in the 2007 South Coast SIP (see 73 FR 

28110, May 15, 2008; as corrected on 73 

FR 34837, June 18, 2008). 

To date, we have taken final action to 

approve the PM10 portion of the 2003 

South Coast SIP, see 70 FR 69081 

(November 14, 2005), but have not taken 

action on any other portions of the plan. 

With respect to the CO portion of the 

plan, while we have not taken action on 

the CO portion of the 2003 South Coast 

SIP, we have taken action to approve a 

later-submitted plan, the 2005 South 

Coast CO Maintenance Plan, and have 

taken action to approve ARB’s 

redesignation request for the South 

Coast to ‘‘attainment’’ for CO. See 72 FR 

26718 (May 11, 2007). We consider the 

submittal and approval of the CO 

maintenance plan and redesignation 

request to supersede the CO portion of 

the 2003 South Coast SIP and plan to 

take no further action on CO portion of 

the plan.14 Today’s document addresses 

the remaining portions of the 2003 

South Coast SIP (i.e., the ozone and NO2

portions of the plan). 

III. Review of the 2003 State Strategy 

and 2003 South Coast SIP 

A. Procedural Requirements 

CAA section 110(l) requires revisions 

to a SIP to be adopted by the state after 

reasonable notice and public hearing. 

EPA has promulgated specific 

requirements for SIP revisions in 40 

CFR part 51, subpart F. 

The ARB provided the requisite 

notice and public comment periods 

prior to adoption of the 2003 State 

Strategy. Notices for a public hearing to 

be held on September 24–25, 2003 (later 

postponed to October 23, 2003), and for 

the availability of the Draft 2003 State 

Strategy, were published on August 25, 

2003. At its October 23, 2003 Board 

hearing, ARB adopted the 2003 State 

Strategy as a revision to the California 

SIP, and submitted the revision to EPA 

for approval on January 9, 2004. 

The SCAQMD provided the requisite 

notice and public comment periods 

prior to adoption of the 2003 South 

Coast AQMP. The Draft 2003 South 

Coast AQMP was released for public 

comment on February 5, 2003, and 

proposed modifications to the draft 

plan, as well as responses to comments 

on the draft plan, were released for 

public comment in June 2003. Notices 

for five public hearings held on various 

dates in July 2003 and on August 1, 

2003, and for the availability of the 

revised Draft 2003 South Coast AQMP, 

were published on June 6, 2003. At the 

August 1, 2003 Governing Board 

meeting, the District adopted the 2003 

South Coast AQMP and submitted the 

plan to ARB shortly thereafter. ARB 

adopted the plan, with certain 

modifications, as a revision to the 

California SIP on October 23, 2003 in 

accordance with state law, and 

submitted the revision to EPA for 

approval on January 9, 2004. 

The SIP submittal packages for the 

2003 State Strategy and the 2003 South 

Coast SIP include evidence of public 

notices and hearings, agency responses 

to public comments, and evidence of 

District and ARB adoptions as described 

above. Based on review of these 

materials, we find that the State has met 

the procedural requirements of CAA 

section 110(l) and 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart F for submittal of the two SIP 

revisions. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
63412 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

15On April 1, 2003, EPA approved EMFAC2002 

for use in SIP development and required its use in 

transportation conformity analyses in California (68 

FR 15720). On January 18, 2008, we approved an 

updated version of EMFAC, EMFAC2007, for use by 

California state and local governments to meet CAA 

requirements. See 73 FR 3464. We are proposing 

approval of the revised emissions inventories that 

rely on the earlier version of EMFAC because the 

earlier version was the one approved at the time 

when the 2003 South Coast SIP was submitted to 

EPA. 

B. Base Year and Projected Baseline 

Emissions Inventory 

CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) 

require nonattainment areas to submit a 

comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources, in accordance with guidance 

provided by the EPA. The inventory is 

to represent emissions during the 

appropriate season; for example, ozone 

precursor (VOC and NOX) inventories 

are to represent summer weekday 

emissions. See EPA’s General Preamble 

for implementation of title I of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498 

(April 16, 1992) (‘‘General Preamble’’), 

at 13502. EPA guidance for 1-hour 

ozone SIP emission inventories 

includes, in addition to the General 

Preamble: ‘‘Procedures for the 

Preparation of Emission Inventories for 

Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of 

Ozone, Volume I: General Guidance for 

Stationary Sources,’’ EPA–450/4–91– 

016; and ‘‘Procedures for Emission 

Inventory Preparation, Volume IV: 

Mobile Sources,’’ EPA–450/5–91–026d 

Revised. 

In 2000, we approved the base and 

future year (summer season) emissions 

inventories in the 1997 South Coast 

AQMP as meeting the requirements of 

CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1). 

See 65 FR 18903, at 18904 (April 10, 

2000). In 1998, we approved the base 

and future year (winter season) 

emissions inventories in the 1997 South 

Coast AQMP for the purposes of the 

NO2 maintenance plan. See 63 FR 39747 

(July 24, 1998). The 2003 South Coast 

AQMP contains revised base and future 

year emissions inventories for ozone 

precursors, VOC and NOX (summer 

season), and for NOX (winter season, for 

NO2 planning purposes). The District 

describes the basis for the revisions in 

the inventories in chapter 3 of the 2003 

South Coast AQMP. More detail is 

provided in appendix III of the plan. 

The emissions inventories in the 2003 

South Coast AQMP reflect estimates of 

emissions from numerous source 

subcategories within four major 

categories of sources, i.e., point, area, 

off-road, and on-road. The plan presents 

annual average day inventories, as well 

as planning inventories (summer for 

ozone and winter for NO2), for 1995, 

1997, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 

2007, 2008, 2010, and 2020. The plan 

also includes a reconstructed emissions 

inventory for 1990, the base year for air 

quality planning under the CAA 

Amendments of 1990. 

The inventories reflect updated 

demographic data, and vehicle activity 

forecasts, as well as updated calculation 

methods. The on-road emissions were 

calculated using ARB’s EMFAC2002 

emission factors 15 and the 

transportation activity data provided by 

the Southern California Association of 

Governments (SCAG) from their 2001 

Regional Transportation Plan. Emissions 

estimates from off-road vehicle 

categories (e.g., trains, ships, 

construction equipment) were 

developed using ARB’s OFF-ROAD 

emissions model, which calculates 

emissions from more than 100 types of 

off-road sources. 

Area source emissions were jointly 

developed by ARB and the District for 

a total of 350 categories. For 1997, 

reported data are used for point sources 

emitting more than 4 tons per year of 

any one of the criteria air contaminants 

(i.e., VOC, NOX, SOX, or particulate 

matter) except for CO for which the data 

reporting threshold is 100 tons per 

year). (See Appendix III of 2003 South 

Coast AQMP.) The future emission 

forecasts are based on demographic and 

economic growth projections provided 

by SCAG, and take into account 

emission reductions resulting from ARB 

and District regulations adopted by 

October 31, 2002. 

The emissions inventory requirements 

of CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) 

were met in the 1994 Ozone Plan, and 

then, as amended, in the 1997 South 

Coast AQMP. Based on our review of 

the inventory documentation included 

in the 2003 South Coast AQMP, we find 

that the emission inventories in the 

2003 South Coast AQMP are also 

comprehensive, accurate, and current at 

the time the SIP was submitted, and 

improved relative to those that are in 

the approved SIP. Accordingly, we 

propose to approve the base and future 

year emissions inventories (summer and 

winter seasons) in the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP as meeting the requirements of 

CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 181(a)(1). 

C. Control Measures and Contingency 

Measures 

The CAA requires that SIPs ‘‘shall 

include enforceable emission 

limitations, and such other control 

measures, means or techniques * * *, 

as well as schedules and timetables for 

compliance, as may be necessary or 

appropriate to provide for attainment 

* * * by the applicable attainment date 

* * *.’’ CAA section 172(c)(6). The 

CAA also allows areas classified as 

extreme to include ‘‘provisions * * * 

which anticipate development of new 

control techniques or improvement of 

existing control technologies, * * * if 

the State demonstrates * * * that—(A) 

such provisions are not necessary to 

achieve the incremental emission 

reductions required during the first 10 

years after the date of the enactment of 

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990; 

and (B) the State has submitted 

enforceable commitments to develop 

and adopt contingency measures to be 

implemented * * * if the anticipated 

technologies do not achieve planned 

reductions.’’ CAA section 182(e)(5). The 

latter provisions which anticipate 

development of new control techniques 

or improvement of existing control 

technologies are often referred to as the 

‘‘black box.’’ 

1. State’s Defined Measures 

In 1997, we approved all of the State’s 

control measures contained in the 1994 

Ozone SIP that EPA had not previously 

approved. See 62 FR 1150 at 1183 

(January 8, 1997). EPA’s 1997 approval 

included assignment of specific 

emissions reductions by nonattainment 

area and milestone year for all of the 

State control measures, including those 

previously approved, under section 

110(k)(3), 182(e)(5), and 301(a) of the 

CAA. In 1999, we approved a revision 

to the State’s commitment to achieve 

long-term emissions reductions in the 

South Coast at the close of the Public 

Consultative Process. See 64 FR 39923, 

at 39926–39927 (July 23, 1999). 

ARB intended the 2003 State Strategy, 

as submitted on January 9, 2004, to 

update and entirely replace the State’s 

control strategy contained in the 1994 

Ozone SIP (as modified in 1999 for the 

South Coast); however, as noted 

previously, on February 13, 2008, ARB 

withdrew key components of the 

strategy with respect to the South Coast, 

including the near-term annual 

emissions reductions commitments, 

additional emissions reduction 

commitment for the South Coast, and 

the ‘‘black box’’ emissions reduction 

commitment. Therefore, with these key 

components missing, we do not 

interpret the remaining component the 

2003 State Strategy (i.e., commitment 

for near-term defined measures) as 

replacing the ozone control strategy, but 

rather as a set of new measures to 

achieve additional emissions reductions 

in the South Coast by the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS attainment date of 2010. 

The remaining component of the 2003 

State Strategy is a commitment by ARB 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63413 

16 In the case of control measure LT/MED–DUTY– 

2, the commitment is not ARB’s, but rather, the 

Bureau of Automotive Repair’s (BAR’s) 

commitment. BAR’s commitment to adopt the 

measure is documented in appendix I–1 of the 

Proposed 2003 State and Federal Strategy for the 

California State Implementation Plan (August 25, 

2003). 

to have its staff submit to the Board and 

propose for adoption the control 

measures set forth in Table 1.16 Under 

the 2003 State Strategy, the ARB staff 

proposal for each control measure must, 

at a minimum, achieve the estimated 

emission reductions set forth in Table 1 

of this document (derived from the 2003 

State Strategy, ARB Resolution 03–22, 

Attachment A–6, Table I–7). Where a 

range of estimated emission reductions 

is shown, the ARB staff proposal must, 

at a minimum, achieve the lower end of 

the range of reductions. ARB’s Board 

then must take action on or before the 

action dates set forth in Table 1, but 

such action by the Board may include 

any action within its discretion. The 

measures themselves are discussed in 

detail in sections II and III of the 

Proposed 2003 State and Federal 

Strategy for California SIP (August 25, 

2003). We note that, based on Table 1– 

3 in the Final 2007 South Coast AQMP 

(June 2007) and further investigation by 

EPA as to the status of ARB’s 

rulemakings, we believe that ARB staff 

proposals were submitted to the Board 

for most of the 15 obligations listed in 

Table 1 and that ARB has taken action 

on such proposals. Similarly we believe 

that the Bureau of Automotive Repair 

(BAR) has fulfilled its one obligation. 

TABLE 1—DEFINED STATE MEASURES TO BE DEVELOPED AND PROPOSED

[Source: 2003 State Strategy, ARB Resolution 03–22, Attachment A–6, Table I–7] 

Strategy (agency) Name Final action 

date 

Implementation date 

Expected reductions 

(south coast 2010) 

VOC NOX

LT/MED-DUTY–1 (ARB) ...... Replace or Update Emission Control Systems on Existing Passenger Vehicles.2005 2007–2008 0–20 ........ 0–20. 

LT/MED-DUTY–2 (BAR) ...... Improve Smog Check to Reduce Emissions from Existing Passenger and Cargo Vehicles.2002–2005 2002–2006 5.6–5.8 ..... 8.0–8.4. 

ON-RD HVY-DUTY–1 (ARB) Augment Truck and Bus Highway Inspections with Community-Based Inspections.2003 2005 0–0.1 ....... 0. 

ON-RD HVY-DUTY–3 (ARB) Pursue Approaches to Clean Up the Existing and New 

Truck/Bus Fleet.

2003–2006 2004–2010 1.4–4.5 .... 16–21. 

OFF-RD CI–1 (ARB) ............ Pursue Approaches to Clean Up the Existing HeavyDuty Off-Road Equipment Fleet (Compression Ignition 

Engines).

2004–2008 2006–2010 2.3–7.8 .... 8–10. 

OFF-RD LSI–1 (ARB) .......... Set Lower Emission Standards for New Off-Road Gas 

Engines(Spark-Ignited Engines 25 hp and Greater).

2004–2005 2007 0 .............. 0.8. 

OFF-RD LSI–2 (ARB) .......... Clean Up Off-Road Gas Equipment Through Retrofit 

Controls and New Emissions Standards (Spark-Ignited 

Engines 25 hp and Greater).

2004 2006–2012 0.8–2.0 ..... 2–4. 

SMALL OFF-RD–1 (ARB) .... Set Lower Emission Standards for New Handheld Small 

Engines and Equipment (Spark-Ignited Engines under 

25 hp such as Weed Trimmers, Leaf Blowers, and 

Chainsaws).

2003 2005 1.9 ........... 0.2. 

SMALL OFF-RD–2 (ARB) .... Set Lower Emission Standards for New Non-Handheld 

Small Engines and Equipment (Spark-Ignited Engines 

under 25 hp such as Lawnmowers).

2003 2007 6.3–7.4 ..... 0.6–1.9. 

MARINE–1 (ARB) ................ Pursue Approaches to Clean Up the Existing Harbor 

Craft Fleet—Cleaner Engines and Fuels.

2003–2005 2005 0.1 ........... 2.7. 

MARINE–2 (ARB) ................ Pursue Approaches to Reduce Land-Based Port Emissions—Alternative Fuels, Cleaner Engines, Retrofit 

Controls, Electrification, Education Programs, Operational Controls.

2003–2005 2003–2010 0.1 ........... 0.1. 

FUEL–2 (ARB) ..................... Set Low-Sulfur Standards for Diesel Fuel for Trucks/ 

Buses, Off-Road Equipment, and Stationary Engines.

2003 2006 Enabling ... Enabling. 

CONS–1 (ARB) .................... Set New Consumer Products Limits for 2006 .................. 2003–2004 2006 2.3 ........... 0. 

CONS–2 (ARB) .................... Set New Consumer Products Limits for 2008–2010 ........ 2006–2008 2008–2010 8.5–15 ...... 0. 

FVR–1 (ARB) ....................... Increase Recovery of Fuel Vapors from Aboveground 

Storage Tanks.

2003 2007 0–0.1 ....... 0. 

FVR–2 (ARB) ....................... Recover Fuel Vapors from Gasoline Dispensing at Marinas.2006–2009 2006–2010 0–0.1 ........ 0. 

PEST–11 (DPR) ................... Implement Existing Pesticide Strategy ............................. 1996–2010 Base-line .. N/A. 

Potential Range for Defined Near-Term State Measures ................................................................................................... 33.3–72.9 38.4–69.1 

1We interpret our approval of this measure as maintaining the status quo with respect to the existing pesticide strategy (i.e., the SIP will continue to reflect the strategy as approved by EPA in 1997). 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
63414 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

17 In the alternative, if ARB indicates an intention 

to replace the existing SIP ozone strategy by the 

commitment for near-term measures shown in table 

1 of this document, then we propose to disapprove 

the set of defined measures on the basis that the 

State has not provided a demonstration that 

replacement of the existing SIP ozone strategy by 

the set of measures in table 1 would not interfere 

with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or 

any other applicable requirement of the Act. See 

CAA section 110(l). 

18Our approval made enforceable the District’s 

commitment to achieve the overall emissions 

reduction schedule and creates the possibility of 

District control measure adjustments and 

substitutions under the approved SIP, so long as the 

overall emission reductions obligations are met. 

Assuming that the remaining 

component of the 2003 State Strategy 

adds to, but does not replace, the 

existing SIP ozone strategy, we propose 

to approve the State commitments with 

respect to the near-term defined 

measures listed in table 1 as described 

above as strengthening the SIP.17 We 

propose to approve the State’s 

commitments with respect to the nearterm defined measures, not as fulfilling 

any particular requirement under the 

CAA, but as a strengthening of the 

South Coast portion of the California 

SIP. As such, our proposed approval is 

made under CAA sections 110(k)(3) and 

301(a). 

2. District’s Near-Term Control 

Measures, Annual Emissions 

Reductions Commitment, and 

Contingency Measure 

In 2000, under CAA section 110(k)(3), 

we approved the District’s commitment 

to adopt and implement the short- and 

intermediate-term control measures in 

the 1997/1999 South Coast Ozone SIP 

by the dates specified to achieve the 

identified emissions reductions, and the 

District’s commitment to adopt and 

implement control measures to achieve 

the identified annual emissions 

reduction commitments for 1999 to 

2008.18

The 2003 South Coast AQMP includes 

an updated list of commitments for 

those District control measures that 

remain from the 1997/1999 South Coast 

Ozone SIP, and a set of new District 

commitments to adopt near-term control 

measures. See table 2 of this document. 

Consistent with the approach in the 

1997/1999 South Coast SIP, the District 

commits to meet the adoption dates, 

implementation dates, and emission 

reduction targets shown in table 2 

(derived from table 4–1 of the 2003 

South Coast AQMP), unless a measure, 

in whole or in part, is determined to be 

infeasible. 

Also consistent with the 1997/1999 

South Coast SIP, the District includes in 

the 2003 plan an additional enforceable 

commitment to achieve aggregate 

emission reductions through a schedule 

of rule adoption and implementation for 

specific years. See table 3 of this 

document. Under the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP, the District reserves the right to 

substitute measures listed in table 2 (of 

this document) with other measures, 

provided that the given measure is 

found to be infeasible and that the 

overall equivalent emission reductions 

by adoption and implementation dates 

shown in tables 3 and 4 (of this 

document) are maintained. Based on 

table 1–2 of the 2007 South Coast 

AQMP (June 2007), we believe that most 

of the District’s near-term commitments 

with respect to control measures for 

which emission reductions targets are 

identified have been met. 

TABLE 2—DISTRICT’S NEAR-TERM VOC AND NOX CONTROL MEASURES

[Source: 2003 South Coast AQMP, Table 4–1] 

Control measure Title of control measure Reduction target 1 (tons/day) 

Remaining 1997/1999 South Coast Ozone Plan Control Measures 

CTS–07 ................... Further Emission Reductions from Architectural Coatings and Cleanup Solvents (Rule 1113) (VOC) ....... 8.5 

CTS–10 ................... Miscellaneous Industrial Coatings and Solvent Operations (VOC) ............................................................... 3.0 

FUG–05 ................... Emission Reductions from Fugitive Emissions Sources (VOC) .................................................................... 2.0 

MSC–01 .................. Promotion of Lighter Color Roofing and Road Materials and Tree Planting Programs (All Pollutants) ....... TBD 

MSC–03 .................. Promotion of Catalyst-Surface Coating Technology Programs (All Pollutants) ............................................ TBD 

PRC–07 ................... Industrial Process Operations (VOC) ............................................................................................................ 2.0 

WST–01 2 ................ Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste (VOC) ...................................................................................... 4.8 

WST–02 3 ................ Emission Reductions from Composting ......................................................................................................... 1.2 

FSS–04 4 ................. Emission Charges of $5,000 per Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources Emitting Over 10 Tons per Year 

(VOC).

TBD 

FLX–01 .................... Economic Incentive Programs ....................................................................................................................... TBD 

New Control Measures 

CMB–10 .................. Additional NOX Reductions for RECLAIM (NOX) .......................................................................................... 3.0 

MSC–05 .................. Truck Stop Electrification (NOX) .................................................................................................................... 2.1 

MSC–07 .................. Natural Gas Fuel Specifications (NOX) ......................................................................................................... TBD 

MSC–08 .................. Further Emission Reductions from Large VOC Sources (VOC) ................................................................... TBD 

FSS–05 5 ................. Mitigation Fee Program for Federal Sources (All Pollutants) ........................................................................ TBD 

FSS–06 ................... Further Emission Reductions from In-Use Off-Road Vehicles and Equipment (VOC, NOX, PM10) ............. TBD 

FSS–07 ................... Emission Fee Program for Port-related Mobile Sources (All Pollutants) ...................................................... TBD 

Total ................. VOC ............................................................................................................................................................... 21.5 

NOX ................................................................................................................................................................ 5.1 

1The emission reductions estimates are based on the 2010 planning inventory in the 2003 South Coast AQMP. The District notes that the actual reductions are subject to change during the rulemaking process based on the latest available emission inventory data. 2Previously approved in connection with the PM10 portion of the 2003 South Coast AQMP. See 70 FR 69081 (November 14, 2005). 3Previously approved in connection with the PM10 portion of the 2003 South Coast AQMP. See 70 FR 69081 (November 14, 2005). 4The measure is intended to achieve reductions after the 2010 attainment date. 

5Proposed for disapproval herein. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63415 

19We are proposing in this document to 

disapprove the rate-of-progress demonstration in 

the 2003 South Coast AQMP, but we note that CTY– 

01, by its terms, could be triggered under the 

District’s RFP program regardless of our action on 

the ROP demonstration. 

Based on our review of the District’s 

updated strategy in the 2003 South 

Coast AQMP for achieving near-term 

emissions reductions, and the progress 

the District has achieved to date in 

implementing the measures, we propose 

to approve the District’s commitment to 

adopt the near-term measures listed in 

table 2 (except for FSS–05, as described 

below) and commitment to achieve 

aggregate emissions reductions through 

the rule and adoption schedule shown 

in table 3. 

TABLE 3—DISTRICT’S NEAR-TERM VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS COMMITMENT TO BE ACHIEVED THROUGH

RULE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION 1

[Source: 2003 South Coast AQMP, Table 4–8A] 

Year 

VOC NOX

Based on 

adoption date 

Based on 

implementation 

date 

Based on 

adoption date 

Based on 

implementation 

date 

2002 ................................................................................................. 0.6 ............................ ............................ ............................

2003 ................................................................................................. 16.9 0.6 ............................ ............................

2004 ................................................................................................. 2.0 ............................ 3.0 ............................

2005 ................................................................................................. 2.0 ............................ 2.1 ............................

2006 ................................................................................................. ............................ 4.8 ............................ ............................

2007 ................................................................................................. ............................ 2.0 ............................ 2.1 

2008 ................................................................................................. ............................ 12.1 ............................ ............................

2009 ................................................................................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

2010 ................................................................................................. ............................ 2.0 ............................ 3.0 

Total .......................................................................................... 21.5 21.5 5.1 5.1 

1 In tons per day based on the 2010 planning inventory in the 2003 South Coast AQMP. 

Like the State defined control 

measures discussed above, we propose 

to approve the District’s updated 

strategy for near-term emissions 

reductions in the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP, not as fulfilling any particular 

requirement under the CAA, but as a 

strengthening of the South Coast portion 

of the California SIP. As such, our 

proposed approval is made under CAA 

sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a). 

One particular District control 

measure, FSS–05 (‘‘Mitigation Fee 

Program for Federal Sources’’), assigns 

to EPA the responsibility of adopting a 

mitigation fee program. See page 4–17 of 

the 2003 South Coast AQMP. Under this 

program, the mitigation fee would be 

paid by the owners of such sources as 

aircraft, ocean-going vessels, trains, and 

pre-empted off-road equipment (that are 

under the jurisdiction of EPA) through 

EPA rulemaking and/or EPA grants to 

the District. The District would then use 

the monies collected to implement 

strategies for both federal and nonfederal sources to achieve equivalent 

reductions for SIP purposes. We 

propose to disapprove this particular 

control measure on the grounds that 

States are not given the authority under 

the CAA to assign emission reductions 

responsibilities to the Federal 

Government. For a detailed discussion 

of EPA’s view on ‘‘federal assignments,’’ 

see EPA’s final rule approving the 1994 

Ozone SIP (62 FR 1150, at 1152–1155 

(January 8, 1997). 

Under the 2003 South Coast AQMP, 

the expected progress in meeting the 

AQMP attainment goals, measured in 

terms of emission reductions, is verified 

through the annual auditing program 

called the Reasonable Further Progress 

(RFP) program. In the event the RFP 

program shows that the implementation 

of the plan is not providing adequate 

progress and the interim emission 

reduction goals have not been met, the 

District must take action to bring 

forward measures that are scheduled for 

later adoption or implementation, or to 

implement certain other contingency 

measures. See section 2 of appendix IV– 

A of the 2003 South Coast AQMP. With 

respect to progress towards the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS, the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP includes one contingency 

measure, CTY–01—Accelerated 

Implementation of Control Measures, 

that would accelerate the starting 

implementation date for the stationary 

and mobile source control measures that 

have implementation dates on and after 

2004. The original and revised (i.e., 

under CTY–01) starting implementation 

dates of the stationary and mobile 

source control measures affected by the 

contingency measure are shown in table 

2 of chapter 9 of the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP. As noted above, we believe that 

most of the District’s near-term 

commitments to adopt defined measures 

have been met. 

Based on our review of contingency 

measure strategy, and the progress the 

District has achieved to date in 

implementing the measures, we propose 

to approve CTY–01 (except for the 

individual FSS–05, which we are 

proposing to disapprove for the reasons 

given above) as a strengthening of the 

South Coast portion of the California 

SIP.19 As such, our proposed approval 

is made under CAA sections 110(k)(3) 

and 301(a). 

3. District’s Black Box Emissions 

Reduction Commitment 

In 2000, we approved the District’s 

commitment to adopt and implement 

the long-term ‘‘black box’’ control 

measures in the 1997/1999 South Coast 

Ozone Plan by the dates specified to 

achieve the identified emissions 

reductions under CAA sections 

110(k)(3) and 182(e)(5). See 65 FR 

18903, at 18905 (April 10, 2000). 

In the 1997/1999 South Coast SIP, the 

District calculated that the remaining 

portion of its ‘‘black box’’ commitment 

amounted to 28 tpd of VOC. In the 2003 

South Coast AQMP, the District 

contends that, after implementation of 

its proposed near-term measures, the 

District would be exceeding its emission 

target in the 1997/1999 South Coast SIP 

by about 65 tpd of VOC. As such, the 

District’s ‘‘black box’’ commitment in 

the 1997/1999 South Coast SIP of 28 tpd 

has been fulfilled. Nonetheless, in view 

of the magnitude of the reductions now 

understood to be needed for attainment 

of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the 

South Coast, the District has adopted an 

additional ‘‘black box’’ commitment of 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
63416 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

31 tpd as shown in table 4 of this 

document. 

TABLE 4—DISTRICT’S BLACK BOX VOC EMISSION REDUCTIONS COMMITMENT TO BE ACHIEVED THROUGH RULE

ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION

[Source: 2003 South Coast AQMP, Table 4–8B] 

Year 

VOC (2010 planning inventory, 

tons/day) 

Based on 

adoption date 

Based on 

implementation 

date 1

2005 ................................................................................................................................................................. 4.0 ............................

2006 ................................................................................................................................................................. 10.0 ............................

2007 ................................................................................................................................................................. 10.0 3.0 

2008 ................................................................................................................................................................. 7.0 10.0 

2009 ................................................................................................................................................................. ............................ 11.0 

2010 ................................................................................................................................................................. ............................ 7.0 

Total ............................................................................................................................................................. 31.0 31.0 

1 Represents the final, full implementation date; typically a rule contains multiple implementation dates. 

As described in the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP (appendix IV–A, section 1, group 

8), the District’s ‘‘black box’’ 

commitment is organized into two tiers. 

The first tier targets (but is not limited 

to) stationary source categories 

including miscellaneous industrial 

coatings and solvent operations, fugitive 

sources, and industrial process 

operations. The second tier targets all 

stationary source categories for which 

feasible reductions can be identified. 

We propose to approve the District’s 

new ‘‘black box’’ commitment in the 

2003 South Coast AQMP, not as 

fulfilling any particular requirement 

under the CAA, but as a strengthening 

of the South Coast portion of the 

California SIP. As such, our proposed 

approval is made under CAA sections 

110(k)(3) and 301(a). 

4. Black Box Emissions Reduction 

Assignment to the Federal Government 

Lastly, the 2003 South Coast AQMP 

allocates a portion of the ‘‘black box’’ to 

the Federal Government. The ‘‘federal 

assignment’’ in the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP calls for the Federal Government 

to achieve emissions reductions of 68 

tpd NOX and 18 tpd VOC in the South 

Coast by 2010. As discussed above in 

connection with District measure FSS– 

05, we propose to disapprove this 

assignment on the grounds that States 

are not given the authority under the 

CAA to assign emission reductions 

responsibilities to the Federal 

Government. 

D. Attainment Demonstration 

All 1-hour ozone areas classified as 

serious or above must demonstrate 

attainment ‘‘as expeditiously as 

practicable’’ but not later than dates 

specified in CAA section 181(a), which 

establishes for extreme areas a deadline 

of November 15, 2010. For purposes of 

demonstrating attainment, CAA section 

182(c)(2)(A) requires serious, severe, 

and extreme areas to use photochemical 

grid modeling or an analytical method 

EPA determines to be as effective. 

In 2000, we approved the attainment 

demonstration for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS in the 1997 South Coast AQMP, 

as amended by the District in 1999, as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

sections 182(c)(2) and (e). See 65 FR 

18903, at 18905 (April 10, 2000). The 

District revised the 1-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration in the 2003 

South Coast AQMP in light of updated 

emissions inventories that show higher 

mobile source emissions than prior 

projections and updated modeling that 

indicates a lower carrying capacity in 

the air basin. The District describes the 

methods, assumptions and results of the 

modeling effort in chapter 5 of the main 

body of the AQMP and provides more 

details on the modeling effort in 

appendix V. 

The 2003 South Coast AQMP’s 

modeled attainment demonstration for 

1-hour ozone relies upon emission 

reductions from the ARB’s control 

strategy as set forth in the 2003 State 

Strategy, most of which was withdrawn 

by ARB on February 13, 2008. As a 

result, we need not conduct a detailed 

review of the modeling to conclude that 

the 2003 South Coast AQMP does not 

meet the CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) 

requirement for a demonstration of 

attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 

by the applicable attainment date (in 

this case, 2010). EPA proposes to 

disapprove the ozone plan with respect 

to the attainment demonstration 

requirements of CAA section 

182(c)(2)(A), because of the deficiencies 

in the control measure portions of the 

plan resulting from the withdrawal of 

the State’s emission reduction 

commitments in the 2003 State Strategy. 

E. Quantitative Milestones and 

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) 

CAA section 172(c)(2) requires 

nonattainment area plans to provide for 

reasonable further progress (RFP) which 

is defined in section 171(1) as such 

annual incremental reductions in 

emissions as are required in part D or 

may reasonably be required by the 

Administrator in order to ensure 

attainment of the relevant NAAQS by 

the applicable date. 

CAA section 182(c)(2) require that 

serious and above area SIPs include 

rate-of-progress (ROP) quantitative 

milestones that are to be achieved every 

3 years after 1996 until attainment. For 

ozone areas classified as serious and 

above, section 182(c)(2) requires that the 

SIP must provide for reductions in 

ozone-season, weekday VOC emissions 

of at least 3 percent per year net of 

growth averaged over each consecutive 

3-year period. This is in addition to the 

15 percent reduction over the first 6- 

year period required by CAA section 

182(b)(1) for areas classified as moderate 

and above. The CAA requires that these 

milestones be calculated from the 1990 

inventory after excluding, among other 

things, emission reductions from ‘‘[a]ny 

measure related to motor vehicle 

exhaust or evaporative emissions 

promulgated by the Administrator by 

January 1, 1990’’ and emission 

reductions from certain federal gasoline 

volatility requirements. CAA section 

182(b)(1)(B)–(D). EPA has issued 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63417 

20Unlike ozone, which peaks in the South Coast 

in the summer and early fall months, NO2 generally 

peaks in the late fall and winter months. The use 

of a planning inventory (winter season) rather than 

an annual-average inventory to update the 

maintenance demonstration for the annual NO2

NAAQS is consistent with the original NO2

maintenance demonstration from the 1997 South 

Coast AQMP, which we approved in 1998 (63 FR 

39747, July 24, 1998). In the 1997 South Coast 

AQMP, the District demonstrated maintenance of 

the annual NO2 NAAQS using a linear rollback 

approach and baseline planning inventories (winter 

season) for NOX to project future-year annual NOX

concentrations from baseline annual NOX

concentrations for several key locations in the 

South Coast representative of areas with historically 

higher NO2 concentrations. Projected future-year 

annual NO2 concentrations were then determined 

from projected annual NOX concentrations using 

average NO2/NOX ratios measured at the key 

locations. See chapter 1 of appendix V to the 1997 

South Coast AQMP (November 1996). 

guidance on meeting 1-hour ozone ROP 

requirements. See General Preamble at 

13516 and ‘‘Guidance on the Post-1996 

Rate-of-Progress Plan and the 

Attainment Demonstration,’’ EPA–452/ 

R–93–015, OAQPS, EPA, February 18, 

1994 (corrected). 

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

NOX reductions which occur after 1990 

to be used to meet the post-1996 ROP 

emission reduction requirements, 

provided that such NOX reductions 

meet the criteria outlined in the CAA 

and EPA guidance. The criteria require 

that: (1) The sum of all creditable VOC 

and NOX reductions must meet the 3 

percent per year ROP requirement; (2) 

the substitution is on a percent-forpercent of adjusted base year emissions 

basis for the relevant pollutant; and (3) 

the sum of all substituted NOX

reductions cannot be greater than the 

cumulative NOX reductions required by 

the modeled attainment demonstration. 

See General Preamble at 13517 and 

‘‘NOX Substitution Guidance,’’ OAQPS, 

EPA, December 1993. Our guidance in 

the General Preamble states that by 

meeting the specific ROP milestones 

discussed above, the general RFP 

requirements in CAA section 172(c)(2) 

will also be satisfied. See the General 

Preamble at 13518. 

In 2000, we approved the revised ROP 

demonstration for the milestone years 

1999, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2010 in the 

1999 amendment to the 1997 South 

Coast AQMP, as meeting the 

requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2) 

and 182(c)(2). See 65 FR 18903, at 18905 

(April 10, 2000). The 2003 South Coast 

AQMP includes a revised demonstration 

for milestone years 2005, 2008, and 

2010. See pages 6–6 through 6–9 of the 

AQMP. The revised ROP demonstration 

in the 2003 South Coast AQMP does not 

rely on emissions reductions from any 

new control measures in the plan but 

relies only on VOC and NOX emission 

reductions from existing District and 

ARB rules. For the milestone years 2005 

and 2008, the ROP demonstration shows 

that baseline VOC emission levels are 

below the target levels. In 2010, 

however, the VOC reductions in the 

baseline are insufficient to meet the 

target, and thus, the plan relies in part 

on NOX substitution. 

Our review of the ROP demonstration 

in the 2003 South Coast AQMP reveals 

a flaw in the calculation method. The 

demonstration purports to adjust 

emissions for the base year (1990) to 

remove the benefit of the pre-1990 

Federal motor vehicle control program 

(FMVCP) and certain federal gasoline 

volatility requirements, as is required 

under the CAA, but the adjustment in 

the ROP table for NOX (table 6–3b in the 

AQMP) has been set at zero, which 

cannot be correct. Given the minimal 

explanation for how the adjustment was 

determined, we can only presume that 

the same calculation method was used 

for the VOC table (table 6–3a). 

Therefore, we conclude that the 

calculation methods used to 

demonstrate rate-of-progress for 2005, 

2008, and 2010 are incorrect, and on 

that basis, we propose to disapprove the 

revised rate-of-progress demonstration 

in the 2003 South Coast AQMP as 

failing to meet the requirements of CAA 

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

F. Transportation Control Measures To 

Offset Growth in Motor Vehicle 

Emissions 

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the CAA 

requires nonattainment areas classified 

as severe or above to adopt and submit 

transportation control measures (TCMs) 

sufficient to offset any growth in 

emissions from growth in vehicle-milestraveled (VMT) or number of vehicle 

trips and to provide for ROP. EPA’s 

interpretation of this provision allows 

areas to satisfy the requirement if they 

demonstrate that emissions from motor 

vehicles decline each year through the 

attainment year. See the General 

Preamble at 13521–13522. The 2003 

South Coast SIP refers to the TCMs in 

appendix IV–C of the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP as the basis for compliance with 

the CAA requirement in section 

182(d)(1)(A). See page 6–10 of the 2003 

South Coast AQMP. As noted in section 

II.E of this document, the TCM portion 

of the 2003 South Coast AQMP, 

including appendix IV–C, was 

withdrawn, and thus, it cannot serve as 

the basis for meeting the requirement. 

However, by letter dated September 

10, 2008, the District provided 

supplemental motor vehicle emissions 

data drawn largely from emissions 

inventory estimates presented in 

appendix III of the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP. See letter from Elaine Chang, 

DrPH, Deputy Executive Officer, 

SCAQMD, to Matt Haber, Deputy 

Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, 

September 10, 2008. Based on the 

emission data presented in appendix III 

of the South Coast AQMP and the 

supplemental information provided by 

SCAQMD on September 10th, we find 

that baseline motor vehicle emissions in 

the South Coast decline each year from 

2003 to the attainment year (2010), and 

that, as a result, no TCMs need be 

included in the plan to offset motor 

vehicle emissions for the purposes of 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A). We therefore 

propose to approve the 2003 South 

Coast SIP, as supplemented on 

September 10, 2008, as meeting the 

TCM offset requirement under CAA 

section 182(d)(1)(A). 

G. Nitrogen Dioxide Maintenance 

Demonstration 

In 1998, EPA approved the nitrogen 

dioxide maintenance plan that was 

included as an element of the 1997 

South Coast AQMP. The 2003 South 

Coast SIP updates the original 

maintenance plan with more current air 

monitoring data and emissions 

estimates and projections. See page 

6–11 of the 2003 South Coast AQMP. In 

support of its conclusion that the 

updated plan demonstrates maintenance 

of the nitrogen dioxide NAAQS, 

SCAQMD refers to ambient monitoring 

data that continues to show 

concentrations below the NAAQS and 

to the downward trend in baseline NOX

emissions. 

Based on our review of the monitoring 

data presented in chapter 2 of the 2003 

South Coast AQMP, which show a 

maximum concentration in 2001 among 

the 23 monitoring stations of less than 

80% of the NAAQS, and the emissions 

estimates presented in chapter 3, which 

show a decline from nearly 1,300 tpd 

(winter season) of NOX in 1997, to 1,000 

tpd in 2006, to 820 tpd in 2010, we 

agree with SCAQMD that the 2003 

South Coast AQMP demonstrates 

maintenance of the nitrogen dioxide 

NAAQS.20 Therefore, we propose to 

approve the update of the NO2

maintenance demonstration in the 2003 

South Coast SIP. 

H. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEBs) 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects in nonattainment or 

maintenance areas that are funded or 

approved under title 23 U.S.C. and the 

Federal Transit Laws (49 U.S.C. Chapter 

53) must conform to the applicable SIP. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
63418 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

21 In table 6–7 of the 2003 South Coast AQMP, a 

footnote to the NOX MVEB states: ‘‘2003 budget 

applicable to future years, including the last year 

of maintenance plan (i.e., 2010).’’ We interpret this 

language as establishing a MVEB for year 2003 and 

for year 2010 and not as establishing a budget for 

each intervening year and the years after 2010. An 

interpretation otherwise would be unreasonable in 

that it would necessitate a conformity 

determination for NO2 by SCAG for each of the 

intervening years and for an indeterminate number 

of future years. 

22On January 18, 2008, we approved an updated 

version of EMFAC, EMFAC2007, for use by 

California state and local governments to meet CAA 

requirements. See 73 FR 3464. We are proposing 

approval of the NOX budgets for NO2 in the 2003 

South Coast AQMP despite the fact that they reflect 

an earlier-approved version of EMFAC 

(EMFAC2002) because the earlier version was the 

one approved at the time when the 2003 South 

Coast SIP was submitted to EPA. 

In short, a transportation plan and 

program are deemed to conform to the 

applicable SIP if the emissions resulting 

from the implementation of that 

transportation plan and program are less 

than or equal to the MVEBs established 

in the control strategy SIPs for the 

attainment year, ROP years, 

maintenance year and other analysis 

years. See, generally, 40 CFR part 93. 

On March 11, 2004, we found the 

NOX and VOC MVEBs for ozone, and 

the NOX MVEB for nitrogen dioxide, in 

the 2003 South Coast SIP to be adequate 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

Letter from Deborah Jordan, EPA to 

Catherine Witherspoon, ARB, March 11, 

2004. A table attached to the letter 

summarized our adequacy 

determination. Our notice of adequacy 

for these budgets was published in the 

Federal Register on March 25, 2004 at 

69 FR 15325 and was effective 15 days 

later, on April 9, 2004. We are now 

proposing to disapprove the VOC and 

NOX MVEBs for 1-hour ozone, and to 

approve the NOX MVEB for nitrogen 

dioxide, for transportation conformity 

purposes. 

With respect to ozone, we propose to 

disapprove the VOC and NOX budgets 

based on our proposed disapprovals of 

the 1-hour ozone ROP and attainment 

demonstrations as discussed above. As 

such, we conclude that the VOC and 

NOX MVEBs in the 2003 South Coast 

SIP, when considered together with all 

other emissions sources, are not 

consistent with applicable requirements 

for RFP and attainment for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS because the plan revision 

as a whole does not provide for RFP and 

attainment. While we are proposing to 

disapprove these 1-hour ozone budgets 

into the SIP, it should be noted that they 

would not be used for future conformity 

determinations even if we were to 

approve them. This is because EPA has 

revoked the 1-hour ozone standard and 

transportation conformity 

determinations are no longer required 

for that air quality standard, and 

because we have already found VOC 

and NOX MVEBs adequate for the 

8-hour ozone standard. See 73 FR 28110 

(May 15, 2008), as corrected at 73 FR 

34837 (June 18, 2008). 

With respect to nitrogen dioxide, we 

propose to approve the NOX MVEB of 

686 tpd (winter season) for years 2003 

and 2010.21 Use of a planning inventory 

(winter) in the 2003 South Coast AQMP 

as the basis for the updated 

maintenance demonstration (and 

corresponding NOX MVEB) for the 

annual NO2 NAAQS is consistent with 

the approach we approved in the 

original NO2 maintenance plan from the 

1997 South Coast AQMP, as discussed 

above. The NOX MVEB is shown in 

table 6–7 of the 2003 South Coast 

AQMP, and, as shown in that table, the 

NOX MVEB for nitrogen dioxide reflects 

baseline 2003 motor vehicle emissions 

(shown in more detail in table C–5 in 

attachment C to appendix III of the 2003 

South Coast AQMP), and as reduced 

slightly by the emissions reductions 

attributed to the District’s adopted 

employer-based trip reduction rule 

(District rule 2202) and State-adopted 

vehicle inspection and maintenance 

program (I/M) improvements not 

accounted for in the baseline motor 

vehicle estimate. The baseline motor 

vehicle estimates are based on ARB’s 

motor vehicle emissions factor model, 

EMFAC2002, which was approved by 

EPA on April 1, 2003 (68 FR 15720) and 

the most recent planning and vehicle 

activity data then available.22

The baseline emissions inventories, 

which reflect baseline motor vehicle 

emissions as well as baseline emissions 

for all other source categories, show a 

decline in NOX emissions through 2010, 

and even if motor vehicle emissions 

estimates in 2010 were equal to the 2003 

MVEB of 686 tpd, overall baseline NOX

emissions in 2010 would still be less 

than the corresponding estimate for 

2003, an attainment year, and thus we 

find the NOX MVEB for 2003, when 

considered with all other emissions 

sources, to be consistent with continued 

maintenance of the nitrogen dioxide 

NAAQS through 2010. 

IV. Public Comment and Final Action 

Under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, 

and for the reasons discussed above, 

EPA proposes the following action on 

the 2003 State Strategy, as submitted on 

January 9, 2004: 

(1) Approval of commitments by State 

agencies to develop and propose 16 

near-term defined control measures (15 

for ARB and 1 for BAR) to achieve 

specified emissions reductions in the 

South Coast as listed in table 1 of this 

document and the continuation of the 

existing pesticide strategy. 

Also under section 110(k)(3) of the 

CAA, and for the reasons discussed 

above, EPA proposes the following 

actions on the 2003 South Coast SIP, as 

submitted on January 9, 2004: 

(1) Approval of base year and 

projected baseline emission inventories 

under CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 

182(a)(1); 

(2) Approval of the District’s 

commitment to adopt and implement 

near-term control measures as shown in 

table 2 of this document (except FSS– 

05), the District’s commitment to 

achieve emissions reduction through a 

schedule of adoption and 

implementation as shown in table 3 of 

this document, and the District’s 

contingency measure CTY–01 

(‘‘Accelerated Implementation of 

Control Measures’’), as strengthening 

the SIP; 

(3) Disapproval of District control 

measure FSS–05 (‘‘Mitigation Fee 

Program for Federal Sources’’) that 

assigns control measure responsibility 

to the Federal Government; 

(4) Approval of District’s ‘‘black box’’ 

VOC emission reduction commitment of 

31 tpd; 

(5) Disapproval of the ‘‘black box’’ 

emission reduction commitment of 68 

tpd of NOX and 18 tpd of VOC assigned 

to the Federal Government; 

(6) Disapproval of the attainment 

demonstration because control measures 

upon which the demonstration relies 

have been withdrawn; 

(7) Disapproval of the reasonable 

further progress demonstration because 

the calculations do not properly account 

for the emissions reductions from the 

pre-1990 FMVCP and certain federal 

gasoline volatility requirements; 

(8) Approval of the demonstration 

that no TCM offsets are required under 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) based on 

baseline motor vehicle emissions 

projections as supplemented by the 

District; 

(9) Approval of the revised nitrogen 

dioxide maintenance demonstration 

based on the downward trend in 

baseline NOX emissions; 

(10) Disapproval of the 1-hour ozone 

(VOC and NOX) motor vehicle emissions 

budgets in the wake of proposed 

disapprovals of the rate-of-progress and 

attainment demonstrations; and 

(11) Approval of the nitrogen dioxide 

motor vehicle emissions budget of 686 

tpd (year 2003), winter planning 

inventory. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Proposed Rules 63419 

No sanctions clocks or FIP 

requirement would be triggered by our 

disapprovals, if finalized, because the 

approved SIP already contains the plan 

elements that we are proposing to 

disapprove. A disapproval of the 

revisions to the already-approved 

elements would not alter the fact that 

the SIP already meets these statutory 

requirements. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this document 

and will accept comments for the next 

30 days. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

V. 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 action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not 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, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable 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 not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: October 15, 2008. 

Wayne Nastri, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E8–25468 Filed 10–23–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0869, FRL–8721–6] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Diego 

County Air Pollution Control District, 

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 

Control District, and Ventura County 

Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Diego County Air 

Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD), 

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 

Control District (SJVAPCD), and 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control 

District (VCAPCD) portions of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The revisions concern the 

permitting of air pollution sources. We 

are proposing to approve local rules that 

regulate these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by November 24, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2006–0869, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

• E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://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 email 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 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. 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 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 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Yannayon, Permits Office (AIR– 

3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, (415) 972–3534, 

yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rules: SDCAPCD Rule 24, SJVAPCD 

Rule 2050, and VCAPCD Rules 11 and 

29. In the Rules and Regulations section 

of this Federal Register, we are 

approving these local rules in a direct 

final action without prior proposal 

because we believe these SIP revisions 

are not controversial. If we receive 

adverse comments, however, we will 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES