Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 2993 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. 

This action pertaining to ACHD’s 

adoption of CTG standards for 

miscellaneous metal and/or plastic parts 

surface coating processes, automobile 

and light-duty truck assembly coatings, 

miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and 

fiberglass boat manufacturing materials 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements. 

(See section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: December 30, 2015. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart NN—Pennsylvania 

■ 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph 

(c)(2) is amended by revising the entries 

for ‘‘2105.83,’’ ‘‘2105.84,’’ ‘‘2105.85,’’ 

and ‘‘2105.86’’ under part E, subpart 7. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 52.2020 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) * * * 

Article XX or 

XXI citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Additional explanation/ § 52.2063 citation 

*******

Part E—Source Emission and Operating Standards 

*******

Subpart 7—Miscellaneous VOC Sources 

*******

2105.83 ........... Control of VOC Emissions from Miscellaneous 

Metal and/or Plastic Parts Surface Coating Processes.

6/8/13 1/20/16 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

New regulation. 

2105.84 ........... Control of VOC Emissions from Automobile and 

Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings.

6/8/13 1/20/16 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

New regulation. 

2105.85 ........... Control of VOC Emissions from Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives.6/8/13 1/20/16 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

New regulation. 

2105.86 ........... Control of VOC Emissions from Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials.

6/19/15 1/20/16 [Insert Federal 

Register Citation].

New regulation. 

*******

* * * * * 

§ 52.2023 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 52.2023 is amended by 

removing paragraph (m). 

[FR Doc. 2016–00656 Filed 1–19–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0636; FRL–9940–83– 

Region 9] 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; California; San 

Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as 

Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

reclassify the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) 

Moderate nonattainment area, including 

areas of Indian country within it, as a 

Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 

PM2.5 national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS), based on the EPA’s 

determination that the area cannot 

practicably attain these NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date of December 

31, 2015. As a consequence of this 

reclassification, California must submit, 

no later than 18 months from the 

effective date of this reclassification, a 

Serious area attainment plan including 

a demonstration that the plan provides 

for attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards in the SJV area as 

expeditiously as practicable and no later 

than December 31, 2019. The State must 

also submit, no later than 12 months 

after the effective date of this 

reclassification, nonattainment new 

source review (NNSR) SIP revisions to 

implement the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

the SJV area, to the extent those 

requirements have not previously been 

met. 

DATES: This rule is effective on February 

19, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established 

docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2014– 

0636 for this action. Generally, 

documents in the docket for this action 

are available electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California 94105–3901. 

While all documents in the docket are 

listed at http://www.regulations.gov, 

some information may be publicly 

available only at the hard copy location 

(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, 

multi-volume reports), and some may 

not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., confidential business 

information (CBI)). To inspect the 

docket materials in person, please 

schedule an appointment during normal 

business hours with the contact listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR– 

2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 9, (415) 947–4192, 

tax.wienke@epa.gov. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
2994 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

1See proposed rule at 80 FR 1816 (January 13, 

2015) for a more detailed discussion of the 

background for this action, including the history of 

the PM2.5 NAAQS established in 2006, health 

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

as nonattainment for the PM2.5 standards, and the 

EPA’s actions on the submittals from the state of 

California to address the nonattainment area 

planning requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in the SJV. 

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

expression of delegated rulemaking authority. See 

‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

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

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

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

188(b)(1) contain specific timeframes for the EPA to 

reclassify any areas that it determines cannot 

practicably attain the PM2.5 standards by the 

applicable attainment date, these subparagraphs do 

not restrict the general authority to reclassify an 

area, as appropriate, at any time before the 

attainment date but simply specify that, at a 

minimum, the EPA’s authority must be exercised at 

certain times. See id. 

3The PM2.5 monitoring data that EPA reviewed 

indicate that 24-hour PM2.5 design values are at 65 

ug/m3 in the SJV, which is well above the level of 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (35 ug/m3). EPA also 

calculated ‘‘maximum allowed’’ 2015 

concentrations that would enable the area to attain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the end of 2015 

and found that all monitoring sites examined— 

Bakersfield-California Ave, Bakersfield-Planz Rd., 

Fresno-Garland, Fresno-Pacific, and Hanford— 

would have to record negative PM2.5 concentrations 

in 2015 to show PM2.5 design values at or below the 

level of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 80 FR 1816, 

1834 and n. 69 (January 13, 2015). 

4 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009). 

5See proposed rule at 80 FR 1842 (January 13, 

2015). 

6 Id. at 1843. 

7See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 

(April 7, 2015). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Summary of Final Action 

III. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

IV. Final Action 

A. Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Applicable 

Attainment Dates 

B. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of 

Indian Country 

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On January 13, 2015 (80 FR 1816), the 

EPA proposed to approve portions of 

California’s Moderate area plan to 

address the 2006 primary and secondary 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV and to 

reclassify the SJV nonattainment area, 

including areas of Indian country within 

it, from Moderate nonattainment to 

Serious nonattainment for these 

standards, based on the EPA’s 

determination that the area cannot 

practicably attain the NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date of December 

31, 2015.1 Under section 188(b)(1) of the 

CAA, prior to an area’s attainment date, 

the EPA has discretionary authority to 

reclassify as a Serious nonattainment 

area ‘‘any area that the Administrator 

determines cannot practicably attain’’ 

the PM2.5 NAAQS by the Moderate area 

attainment date.2 On March 4, 2013, the 

State submitted a Moderate area 

attainment plan demonstrating that the 

SJV area cannot practicably attain the 

2006 PM2.5 standards by the applicable 

Moderate area attainment date of 

December 31, 2015. The EPA’s proposed 

reclassification of the SJV area was 

based upon our evaluation of the State’s 

submission and ambient air quality data 

for the 2013–2014 period indicating that 

it is not practicable for certain 

monitoring sites within the SJV area to 

show PM2.5 design values at or below 

the level of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

December 31, 2015.3

In our proposed rule, we explained 

that, under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, 

the attainment date for a Serious area 

‘‘shall be as expeditiously as practicable 

but no later than the end of the tenth 

calendar year beginning after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment . . .’’ The 

SJV was designated nonattainment for 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS effective 

December 14, 2009.4 Therefore, as a 

result of our reclassification of the SJV 

area as a Serious nonattainment area, 

the attainment date under section 

188(c)(2) of the Act for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS in this area is as expeditiously 

as practicable but no later than 

December 31, 2019. 

Our proposed rule also identified the 

additional Serious area attainment plan 

elements that California would, upon 

reclassification, have to submit to satisfy 

the statutory requirements that apply to 

Serious areas, including the 

requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title 

I of the Act.5 The EPA explained that, 

under section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the 

State must submit the required 

provisions to implement best available 

control measures (BACM), including 

best available control technology 

(BACT), no later than 18 months after 

reclassification and must submit the 

required attainment demonstration no 

later than 4 years after reclassification. 

Given the December 31, 2019, Serious 

area attainment date applicable to this 

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

however, we noted that we expect the 

State to adopt and submit a Serious area 

plan for these NAAQS well before the 

statutory SIP submittal deadline in CAA 

section 189(b)(2).6

With respect to the nonattainment 

new source review (NNSR) program 

revisions to establish appropriate 

‘‘major stationary source’’ thresholds for 

direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 

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

the EPA proposed to require the State to 

submit these NNSR SIP revisions no 

later than 12 months after the effective 

date of final reclassification, and 

requested comment on this proposed 

12-month timeframe. 

II. Summary of Final Action 

Today we are finalizing only our 

proposal to reclassify the SJV area as a 

Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. We are not taking final 

action at this time on our proposal to 

approve elements of California’s 

Moderate area plan for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS in the SJV and will complete 

that action at a later time. 

As a consequence of our 

reclassification of the SJV area as 

Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS, California is required to 

submit additional SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious areas, including the 

requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title 

I of the Act. For the reasons provided in 

Section III of this preamble, the EPA is 

requiring the State to adopt and submit 

all required components of the Serious 

Area attainment plan for the SJV no 

later than 18 months after the effective 

date of this reclassification. 

We are finalizing our proposal to 

require that California adopt and submit 

NNSR SIP revisions to implement 

subpart 4 requirements for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV area no later 

than 12 months after the effective date 

of this reclassification, to the extent 

those requirements have not already 

been met by the NNSR SIP revisions due 

May 7, 2016 for purposes of 

implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.7

The attainment date under section 

188(c)(2) of the Act for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS in this area is as expeditiously 

as practicable but no later than 

December 31, 2019. 

III. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

The EPA received two comment 

letters on our proposed actions. 

Comment letters were submitted by the 

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 

Control District (‘‘SJVAPCD’’ or 

‘‘District’’), and by Earthjustice on 

behalf of the Central Valley Air Quality 

Coalition, Greenaction, the Association 

of Irritated Residents, the Sierra Club— 

Tehipite Chapter, and Global 

Community Monitor, (‘‘Earthjustice’’) on 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 2995 

8See letter dated February 27, 2015, from Sheraz 

Gill, Director of Strategies and Incentives at 

SJVAPCD, to Wienke Tax, EPA Region 9, ‘‘Re: 

Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0636, Comments 

on Proposed Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; California; San Joaquin 

Valley Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as 

Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ 

and letter dated February 27, 2015 from Paul Cort 

and Adenike Adeyeye, Earthjustice, to Ms. Wienke 

Tax, Air Planning Office, USEPA Region 9. 

9See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 

(April 7, 2015). We are making minor clarifications 

to the regulatory text in 40 CFR 52.245(c) to 

indicate that the May 7, 2016 deadline therein 

pertains only to NNSR SIP revisions necessary to 

implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

February 27, 2015, prior to the close of 

the comment period on our proposal.8

Because we are finalizing only our 

proposal to reclassify the SJV area as 

Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS, we are responding only 

to comments pertaining to the 

reclassification and its consequences. 

We summarize and respond to the 

relevant comments below. In a separate 

rulemaking, we will take final action on 

California’s submitted Moderate area 

plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

SJV and will respond to comments 

pertaining to our proposed action on the 

submitted plan at that time. 

Comment 1: The SJVAPCD supports 

the EPA’s proposal to require the state 

to submit a revised Nonattainment New 

Source Review (NNSR) rule within 

twelve months of the EPA’s serious 

nonattainment reclassification. 

However, the District asks for the EPA 

to clarify that this submission will not 

be required before the EPA can grant an 

extension of the attainment deadline for 

the 1997 PM2.5 standards under CAA 

section 188(e). The District comments 

that the EPA has provided ‘‘no valid 

justification’’ for requiring the revised 

NNSR rule to be submitted before the 

EPA can approve the attainment 

deadline extension, and argues that 

CAA section 188(e) contains ‘‘no 

mention of NSR, either directly or by 

implication, that would lead one to 

believe that the updated NSR rule is 

required prior to approval of the 

attainment deadline extension.’’ The 

District asserts that the EPA is asking it 

to begin an expedited process to adopt 

a serious area NSR rule before the area 

has been reclassified as serious 

nonattainment and without 

implementation rules or guidance. 

Response 1: We are finalizing our 

proposal to require that California adopt 

and submit NNSR SIP revisions to 

implement subpart 4 requirements for 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV area 

no later than 12 months after the 

effective date of this reclassification. We 

note that California is required to 

submit NNSR SIP revisions addressing 

the requirements for Serious PM2.5

nonattainment areas under subpart 4 by 

May 7, 2016, as a result of our previous 

reclassification of the SJV as Serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS.9 Nonattainment NSR SIP 

revisions that satisfy the Serious Area 

requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) 

and 189(e) for purposes of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS may also satisfy these 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

The District’s comments about the 

criteria for an extension of the 

attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5

standards under CAA section 188(e) are 

not relevant to this action, which 

pertains only to the SJV area’s 

classification for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

and related SIP submission deadlines. 

This reclassification action does not 

affect the State’s obligations with 

respect to the 1997 PM2.5 standards or 

any other NAAQS. We previously 

responded to the District’s comments 

concerning the relevance of NNSR SIP 

revisions to the section 188(e) criteria 

for an extension of the attainment date 

for the 1997 PM2.5 standards, as part of 

our final action reclassifying the SJV 

area as a Serious nonattainment area for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 80 FR 

18528, April 7, 2015). 

Comment 2: Earthjustice supports the 

EPA’s proposed reclassification of the 

SJV to serious nonattainment, but 

comments that the agency should 

impose earlier deadlines for the 

submission of BACM measures and the 

serious area attainment demonstration. 

Earthjustice states that CAA section 

189(b)(2) requires a state to submit an 

attainment demonstration for an area 

within 4 years after the area is 

reclassified to serious nonattainment 

and a BACM plan within 18 months 

after the area is reclassified. Earthjustice 

argues that, had the EPA applied the 

requirements of subpart 4 at the time, 

the EPA would have had to reclassify 

the SJV area as Serious within 18 

months after the required date for the 

area’s Moderate area plan, i.e., by 

December 14, 2012, and that the SIP 

submission deadlines should therefore 

be measured from this date. According 

to Earthjustice, this would mean that the 

BACM measures were due June 14, 

2014, and that the serious area 

attainment demonstration is due 

December 14, 2016. For this reason, 

Earthjustice asserts that the EPA should 

declare the BACM submission already 

overdue (triggering a sanctions clock), 

and should require the state to submit 

its attainment demonstration by no later 

than December 14, 2016. Earthjustice 

contends that the EPA’s failure to apply 

these deadlines will ‘‘serve to 

perpetuate EPA’s error’’ in not initially 

applying subpart 4 requirements to 

implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Earthjustice further argues that 

although the EPA did not interpret the 

schedules in section 189(b)(2) to apply 

to PM2.5 plans prior to the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision in Natural Res. Def. Council v. 

EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013) 

(‘‘NRDC’’), the agency’s decision to 

apply these deadlines would not 

represent improper retroactive 

application of the statute. In support, 

Earthjustice cites the U.S. Supreme 

Court in Rivers v. Roadway Express, 

Inc., 511 U.S. 298 (1994) for the 

proposition that judicial construction of 

a statute interprets the statute’s meaning 

‘‘continuously since the date when it 

became law,’’ ‘‘before as well as after’’ 

the court’s decision. Notwithstanding 

disagreements about what constitutes 

retroactive application of subpart 4 

deadlines, however, Earthjustice argues 

that the EPA should exercise its 

discretion, as it has done for the NSR 

SIP deadline, to set a December 14, 2016 

deadline for submission of the serious 

area attainment demonstration. 

Response 2: We disagree with the 

commenter’s assertion that the 

deadlines in CAA section 189(b)(2) for 

submission of the State’s BACM plan 

and Serious Area attainment plan 

should be measured from December 14, 

2012. Section 189(b)(1) of the Act 

requires that ‘‘each State in which all or 

part of a Serious Area is located’’ submit 

a Serious Area attainment 

demonstration and BACM provisions. 

Section 189(b)(2) requires the State to 

submit the Serious Area attainment 

demonstration ‘‘no later than 4 years 

after reclassification of the area to 

Serious’’ and to submit the BACM 

provisions ‘‘no later than 18 months 

after reclassification of the area as a 

Serious Area.’’ These provisions of the 

Act plainly require that states submit 

Serious Area SIP elements only for 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas that have 

been reclassified as Serious under 

subpart 4. 

Prior to this reclassification action, 

the SJV area was classified as a 

Moderate Area for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS and therefore was not subject to 

the requirements for Serious Area plans 

in CAA section 189(b) for these NAAQS. 

Because the EPA did not reclassify the 

SJV area as a Serious Area effective 

December 14, 2012, it is not appropriate 

to establish SIP submission deadlines 

under section 189(b)(2) based on a 

December 14, 2012 reclassification date. 

Moreover, to do so in this instance 

would mean that the BACM provisions 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
2996 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

10 In rulemakings for individual areas subsequent 

to the NRDC decision, the EPA has explained in 

detail its view that the requirements of the CAA 

should not be implemented retroactively based 

upon the court’s decision. See, e.g., 78 FR 41698 

(July 11, 2013) (final redesignation of Indianapolis 

to attainment for 1997 annual PM2.5 standard). The 

U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado 

recently agreed with the EPA’s position that the 

court’s decision in NRDC does not require 

retroactive application of Subpart 4 requirements. 

See WildEarth Guardians v. Gina McCarthy, Case 

No. 13–CV–1275–WJM–KMT (D. Colo., March 11, 

2014) (dismissing plaintiff’s claim that the EPA 

missed a non-discretionary deadline based on 

retroactive application of Subpart 4). 

11 General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537 at n. 15 

(April 16, 1992). 

12 Id. 

13 General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537. 

14 ‘‘State Implementation Plans for Serious PM– 

10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date 

Waivers for PM–10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 41998, 41999 (August 

16, 1994) (the ‘‘PM–10 Addendum’’). 15See 58 FR 3334, 3336 (Jan. 8, 1993) 

(discharging EPA’s statutory duty under section 

188(b)(1)(A) to ‘‘reclassify appropriate initial 

moderate PM–10 nonattainment areas as serious by 

December 31, 1991’’ but noting EPA’s broad 

discretion under section 188(b)(1) to reclassify 

additional areas at a later date); see also 80 FR 

18528 (April 7, 2015) (final discretionary 

reclassification of San Joaquin Valley for 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS signed March 27, 2015). 

16 General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537. Under 

section 188(c)(1) of the Act, December 31, 1994 was 

the latest permissible Moderate area attainment date 

for an area designated nonattainment for PM–10 by 

operation of law under the 1990 CAA Amendments. 

17 General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537. 

18 Id. (‘‘The EPA may exercise this discretion 

where, for example, EPA originally believed an area 

could attain the PM–10 NAAQS by December 31, 

1994 but later determines that it cannot attain’’); see 

also 56 FR 58656, 58657 (Nov. 21, 1991) (noting 

that ‘‘EPA also has discretion to reclassify any of 

these areas as serious after December 31, 1991 (e.g., 

after reviewing the State’s PM–10 SIP), if EPA 

determines they cannot practicably attain the PM– 

10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994’’) and 58 FR 

3334, 3336 (Jan. 8, 1993) (noting that EPA may in 

the future reclassify additional PM–10 

nonattainment areas using its discretionary 

authority in section 188(b)(1)). 

19PM–10 Addendum, 59 FR 41998, 41999 

(August 16, 1994) (‘‘In the future, EPA anticipates 

that, generally, any decision to reclassify an initial 

PM–10 nonattainment area before the attainment 

date will be based on specific facts or circumstances 

demonstrating that the NAAQS cannot practicably 

be attained by December 31, 1994* * *’’). 

20 General Preamble, 57 FR at 13537 and PM–10 

Addendum, 59 FR at 41999. 

21PM–10 Addendum, 59 FR 41998, 41999 at n. 

4 (August 16, 1994). 

22See 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015) (final 

discretionary reclassification of San Joaquin Valley 

for 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS signed March 27, 2015). 

are overdue (as of June 14, 2014) and 

that the Serious Area attainment 

demonstration is due December 14, 

2016, less than one year after the 

effective date of this final 

reclassification action. We do not 

believe that the NRDC court’s January 4, 

2013 decision should be interpreted so 

as to retroactively impose on the State 

subpart 4 requirements and deadlines of 

which it had no notice.10

We also disagree with the 

commenter’s argument that, had the 

EPA applied subpart 4, the EPA would 

have had to reclassify the SJV area by 

December 14, 2012. The commenter 

contends that the EPA’s authority to 

reclassify a Moderate area as Serious 

under CAA section 188(b)(1) is available 

only within the timeframe specified in 

section 188(b)(1)(B), i.e., within 18 

months after the due date for the State’s 

Moderate area SIP. As explained in the 

1992 General Preamble, however, 

‘‘[u]nder the plain meaning of the terms 

of section 188(b)(1), EPA has general 

discretion to reclassify at any time 

before the applicable attainment date 

any area EPA determines cannot 

practicably attain the standards by such 

date’’ (emphases added).11 With respect 

to the dates specified in subsections (A) 

and (B) of section 188(b)(1), the EPA 

specifically explained in the General 

Preamble that ‘‘[t]hese subparagraphs do 

not restrict the general authority [in 

section 188(b)(1)] but simply specify 

that, at a minimum, it must be exercised 

at certain times.’’ 12 This interpretation 

of section 188(b)(1) as allowing the EPA 

to reclassify moderate areas as serious 

‘‘at any time EPA determines that an 

area cannot practicably attain the 

standards by the applicable attainment 

date’’ facilitates the statutory objective 

of attaining the PM–10 standards—e.g., 

by ensuring that additional control 

measures such as BACM are 

implemented sooner and by expediting 

the application of more stringent new 

source review requirements.13 The EPA 

reiterated this interpretation of section 

188(b)(1) in the 1994 PM–10 

Addendum 14 and in several 

discretionary reclassification actions 

subsequent to the 1990 CAA 

Amendments.15

Specifically, with respect to areas 

designated nonattainment by operation 

of law upon enactment of the 1990 CAA 

Amendments (i.e., ‘‘initial’’ PM–10 

nonattainment areas), the EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation of section 

188(b)(1)(A) has been that ‘‘the amended 

Act specifies certain dates by which 

EPA must propose to reclassify 

appropriate moderate areas as serious. 

. . and take final action,’’ where the 

EPA determines that the area cannot 

‘‘practicably’’ attain the PM–10 NAAQS 

by December 31, 1994.16 The EPA 

further explained, however, that ‘‘EPA 

also has discretionary authority under 

section 188(b)(1) to reclassify any of 

these areas as serious at any time, if EPA 

determines they cannot practicably 

attain the PM–10 NAAQS by December 

31, 1994,’’ 17 and provided examples of 

the circumstances that may warrant 

such discretionary reclassification at a 

later date—i.e., after the December 31, 

1991 date specified in section 

188(b)(1)(A).18 In the PM–10 

Addendum, the EPA stated that 

‘‘[s]ection 188(b)(1)(A) provides an 

accelerated schedule by which EPA is to 

reclassify appropriate initial PM–10 

nonattainment areas’’ but reiterated the 

Agency’s interpretation of section 

188(b)(1) as a general grant of authority 

to also reclassify initial PM–10 areas at 

later points in time before the 

attainment date.19

Likewise, the EPA has long 

interpreted section 188(b)(1)(B) as 

establishing a ‘‘timeframe within which 

EPA is to reclassify appropriate areas 

designated nonattainment for PM–10 

subsequent to enactment of the 1990 

Amendments’’ but not as a limitation on 

EPA’s general authority to reclassify 

such areas at any time before the 

applicable attainment date.20 In the PM– 

10 Addendum, the EPA reiterated its 

view that the directive in section 

188(b)(1)(B) ‘‘does not restrict EPA’s 

general authority, but simply specifies 

that it is to be exercised, as appropriate, 

in accordance with certain dates.’’ 21

The EPA recently finalized a 

discretionary reclassification action for 

the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area 

shortly before the applicable attainment 

date, consistent with this interpretation 

of CAA section 188(b)(1).22 In light of 

the EPA’s longstanding and consistent 

interpretation of section 188(b)(1) as a 

general grant of discretionary authority 

to reclassify any Moderate area as a 

Serious area at any time before the 

applicable attainment date, based on a 

determination that the area cannot 

practicably attain the NAAQS by that 

date, we disagree with the commenter’s 

claim that the EPA should have 

reclassified the SJV area as Serious by 

December 14, 2012. 

Upon further consideration and in 

light of the specific circumstances in the 

SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area, however, 

the EPA is exercising its discretion to 

establish a deadline of 18 months from 

the effective date of this final 

reclassification action for the State to 

submit all required components of the 

Serious Area attainment plan for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV. An 18- 

month deadline for submission of these 

SIP elements is appropriate in this 

instance because it both enables the 

EPA to evaluate the required attainment 

plan well before the outermost 

attainment date applicable to the area 

under CAA section 188(c)(2) and 

enables the State to develop its strategy 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 2997 

23The EPA designated and classified the SJV as 

Moderate nonattainment for the 2012 primary 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS effective April 15, 2015. 80 

FR 2206, 2215–16 (January 15, 2015). Under CAA 

section 189(a)(2)(B), California is required to adopt 

and submit a plan to provide for attainment of these 

NAAQS within 18 months after the nonattainment 

designation, i.e., by October 15, 2016. 

24CAA sections 189(a)(2)(B) and 189(b)(2). 

25Section 189(b)(2) establishes outer bounds on 

the SIP submission deadlines and does not preclude 

the EPA’s establishment of earlier deadlines as 

necessary or appropriate to assure consistency 

among the required submissions and to implement 

the statutory requirements, including the 

requirement that attainment be as expeditious as 

practicable. 

26Under CAA section 188(b)(2), the EPA must 

determine within 6 months after the applicable 

attainment date whether the area attained the 

NAAQS by that date. If the EPA determines that a 

Moderate Area is not in attainment after the 

applicable attainment date, the area is reclassified 

by operation of law as a Serious Area, and the 

Serious Area attainment plan is due within 18 

months after such reclassification. CAA sections 

188(b)(2) and 189(b)(2). 

27See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 

(April 7, 2015). 

28Section 189(e) requires that the control 

requirements applicable to major stationary sources 

of PM2.5 also apply to major stationary sources of 

PM2.5 precursors, except where the state 

demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction that such 

sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5

levels that exceed the standard in the area. 

29See 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009). 30 ‘‘Indian country’’ as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 

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

Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the 

United States Government, notwithstanding the 

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

running through the reservation, (b) all dependent 

Indian communities within the borders of the 

United States whether within the original or 

subsequently acquired territory thereof, and 

whether within or without the limits of a state, and 

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

have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way 

running through the same.’’ 

31See 80 FR 1816, at 1843, 1844 (January 13, 

2015). 

for attaining the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

conjunction with its development of a 

plan to provide for attainment of the 

2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 

this same area, which is due October 15, 

2016.23 Although the State’s obligations 

with respect to implementation of a 

Moderate area plan for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS are separate and distinct from 

its obligations with respect to 

implementation of a Serious area plan 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, it is 

reasonable in this instance to require the 

State to develop its control strategies for 

both PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV area in a 

similar timeframe, considering the 

benefits of streamlining these planning 

processes to the extent possible. 

In addition, an 18-month deadline for 

submission of the Serious area plan is 

consistent with both the timeframe for 

initial Moderate area plan submissions 

upon designation of an area as 

nonattainment and the timeframe for 

Serious area plan submissions following 

an EPA determination of failure to attain 

and reclassification by operation of law 

under CAA section 188(b)(2).24 It is 

reasonable for the EPA to exercise its 

discretion to establish a similar SIP 

submission deadline in this instance, 

given the proximity of this action to the 

Moderate area attainment date 

(December 31, 2015) and the likelihood 

that, should the attainment date pass, 

the EPA would have to determine under 

section 188(b)(2) that the SJV area failed 

to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS by that date. 

Although CAA section 189(b)(2) 

generally provides for up to 4 years after 

a discretionary reclassification for the 

State to submit the required attainment 

demonstration, we find it appropriate in 

this case to establish an earlier SIP 

submission deadline to assure timely 

implementation of the statutory 

requirements.25 Furthermore, the 18- 

month SIP submission deadline that we 

are finalizing in this action requires 

California to submit its Serious Area 

plan for the SJV area before the statutory 

SIP submission deadline that would 

apply upon reclassification by operation 

of law under section 188(b)(2).26

Finally, the EPA is requiring 

California to submit revised 

nonattainment NSR program 

requirements no later than 12 months 

after final reclassification, to the extent 

those requirements have not already 

been met by the NNSR revisions due 

May 7, 2016 for purposes of 

implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

the SJV.27 The Act does not specify a 

deadline for the State’s submission of 

SIP revisions to meet NNSR program 

requirements to lower the ‘‘major 

stationary source’’ threshold from 100 

tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA 

section 189(b)(3)) and to address the 

control requirements for major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors 

(CAA section 189(e)) 28 following 

reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment under subpart 4. 

Pursuant to the EPA’s gap-filling 

authority in CAA section 301(a) and to 

effectuate the statutory control 

requirements in section 189 of the Act, 

the EPA is requiring the State to submit 

these NNSR SIP revisions, as well as 

any necessary analysis of and additional 

control requirements for major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, 

no later than 12 months after the 

effective date of final reclassification of 

the SJV area as Serious nonattainment 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. Final Action 

A. Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Applicable 

Attainment Date 

In accordance with section 188(b)(1) 

of the Act, the EPA is taking final action 

to reclassify the SJV area from Moderate 

to Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

primary and secondary 24-hour PM2.5

standards of 35 mg/m3, based on the 

EPA’s determination that the SJV area 

cannot practicably attain these 

standards by the applicable attainment 

date of December 31, 2015. 

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

attainment date for a Serious area ‘‘shall 

be as expeditiously as practicable but no 

later than the end of the tenth calendar 

year beginning after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment. . . .’’ 

The SJV area was designated 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS effective December 14, 2009.29

Therefore, as a result of our 

reclassification of the SJV area as a 

Serious nonattainment area, the 

attainment date under section 188(c)(2) 

of the Act for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

this area is as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than December 

31, 2019. 

B. Reclassification of Reservation Areas 

of Indian Country 

Eight Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the San Joaquin 

Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area: The 

Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Cold Springs Rancheria 

of Mono Indians of California, the North 

Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Picayune Rancheria of 

Chukchansi Indians of California, the 

Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi 

Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain 

Rancheria of California, the Tejon 

Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian 

Tribe of the Tule River Reservation. 

We have considered the relevance of 

our final action to reclassify the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standards to each tribe located within 

the SJV area. As discussed in more 

detail in our proposed rule, we believe 

that the same facts and circumstances 

that support the reclassification for the 

non-Indian country lands also support 

reclassification for reservation areas of 

Indian country 30 and any other areas of 

Indian country where the EPA or a tribe 

has demonstrated that the tribe has 

jurisdiction located within the SJV 

nonattainment area.31 In this final 

action, the EPA is therefore exercising 

our authority under CAA section 

188(b)(1) to reclassify reservation areas 

of Indian country and any other areas of 

Indian country where the EPA or a tribe 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
2998 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

32As discussed in more detail in our proposed 

rule, the EPA sent letters to tribal officials inviting 

government-to-government consultation. The letters 

can be found in the docket. 

33For any Serious area, the terms ‘‘major source’’ 

and ‘‘major stationary source’’ include any 

stationary source that emits or has the potential to 

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

189(b)(3)). 

34See 80 FR 1816, at 1843. (January 13, 2015). 

35See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 

(April 7, 2015). 

has demonstrated that the tribe has 

jurisdiction geographically located in 

the SJV nonattainment area. Section 

188(b)(1) broadly authorizes the EPA to 

reclassify a nonattainment area— 

including any such area of Indian 

country located within such area—that 

the EPA determines cannot practicably 

attain the relevant standards by the 

applicable attainment date. 

In light of the considerations outlined 

above and in our proposed rulemaking 

that support retention of a uniformlyclassified PM2.5 nonattainment area, and 

our finding that it is impracticable for 

the area to attain by the applicable 

attainment date, we are finalizing our 

reclassification of the reservation areas 

of Indian country and any other areas of 

Indian country where the EPA or a tribe 

has demonstrated that the tribe has 

jurisdiction within the San Joaquin 

Valley nonattainment area to Serious for 

the 2006 PM2.5 standards. 

The effect of reclassification would be 

to lower the applicable ‘‘major 

stationary source’’ emissions thresholds 

for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for 

purposes of the NNSR program and the 

Title V operating permit program (CAA 

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

subjecting more new or modified 

stationary sources to these 

requirements. The reclassification may 

also lower the de minimis threshold 

under the CAA’s General Conformity 

requirements (40 CFR part 93, subpart 

B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under the 

General Conformity requirements (40 

CFR part 93, subpart B), federal agencies 

bear the responsibility of determining 

conformity of actions in nonattainment 

and maintenance areas that require 

federal permits, approvals, or funding. 

Such permits, approvals or funding by 

federal agencies for projects in these 

areas of Indian country may be more 

difficult to obtain because of the lower 

de minimis thresholds. 

Given the potential implications of 

the reclassification, the EPA contacted 

tribal officials early in the process of 

developing this action to permit them to 

have meaningful and timely input into 

its development. The EPA invited tribal 

officials to consult during the 

development of the proposed rule and 

following signature of the proposed 

rule.32 On February 17, 2015, the EPA 

received a letter dated January 30, 2015 

from the Tejon Tribe requesting 

information about the proposed 

reclassification. The EPA subsequently 

invited the Tejon Tribe several times to 

participate in a conference call but 

received no response from the Tribe. No 

other Indian tribe has expressed an 

interest in discussing this action with 

the EPA. We continue to invite Indian 

tribes in the SJV to contact the EPA with 

any questions about the effects of this 

reclassification on tribal interests and 

air quality. We note that although 

eligible tribes may opt to seek EPA 

approval of relevant tribal programs 

under the CAA, none of the affected 

tribes will be required to submit an 

implementation plan to address this 

reclassification. 

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements 

As a consequence of our 

reclassification of the SJV area as a 

Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS, California is required to 

submit additional SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious areas, including the 

requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title 

I of the Act. 

The Serious area SIP elements that 

California must submit are as follows: 

1. Provisions to assure that BACM, 

including BACT for stationary sources, 

for the control of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors shall be implemented no 

later than 4 years after the area is 

reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B)); 

2. A demonstration (including air 

quality modeling) that the plan provides 

for attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than December 

31, 2019, or where the State is seeking 

an extension of the attainment date 

under section 188(e), a demonstration 

that attainment by December 31, 2019 is 

impracticable and that the plan provides 

for attainment by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable (CAA 

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

3. Plan provisions that require 

reasonable further progress (RFP) (CAA 

section 172(c)(2)); 

4. Quantitative milestones which are 

to be achieved every 3 years until the 

area is redesignated attainment and 

which demonstrate RFP toward 

attainment by the applicable date (CAA 

section 189(c)); 

5. Provisions to assure that control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources of direct PM2.5 also 

apply to major stationary sources of 

PM2.5 precursors, except where the State 

demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction 

that such sources do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the standard in the area (CAA section 

189(e)); 

6. A comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5

precursors in the area (CAA section 

172(c)(3)); 

7. Contingency measures to be 

implemented if the area fails to meet 

RFP or to attain by the applicable 

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

and 

8. A revision to the NNSR program to 

establish appropriate ‘‘major stationary 

source’’ 33 thresholds for direct PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 

189(b)(3)). 

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

part, that the State must submit the 

required BACM provisions ‘‘no later 

than 18 months after reclassification of 

the area as a Serious Area’’ and must 

submit the required attainment 

demonstration ‘‘no later than 4 years 

after reclassification of the area to 

Serious.’’ For the reasons provided in 

Section III of this preamble (Public 

Comments and EPA Responses), the 

EPA is requiring the State to adopt and 

submit all components of the Serious 

area attainment plan for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS in the SJV no later than 18 

months after the effective date of 

reclassification. 

Finally, for the reasons provided in 

our proposed rule 34 and in our response 

to comments above, we are finalizing 

our proposal to require the State to 

submit NNSR SIP revisions to 

implement subpart 4 Serious Area 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in the SJV area no later than 12 months 

after the effective date of this 

reclassification, to the extent those 

requirements have not already been met 

by the NNSR revisions due May 7, 2016 

for purposes of implementing the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.35

Nonattainment NSR SIP revisions that 

satisfy the Serious Area requirements of 

CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) for 

purposes of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS may 

also satisfy these requirements for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

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


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 2999 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is exempt from review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) because it relates to a 

designation of an area for air quality 

purposes and will reclassify the SJV 

from its current air quality designation 

of Moderate nonattainment to Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. This action does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities. The final rule requires the state 

to adopt and submit SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious areas, and would not 

itself directly regulate any small entities 

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

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate of $100 million or 

more and does not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538). This action itself imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local, or 

tribal governments, or the private sector. 

The final action reclassifies the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers existing 

statutory duties for the state to submit 

SIP revisions. Such a reclassification in 

and of itself does not impose any federal 

intergovernmental mandate. The final 

action does not require any tribes to 

submit implementation plans. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action may have tribal 

implications. However, it will neither 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on federally recognized tribal 

governments, nor preempt tribal law. 

Eight Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment 

area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big 

Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Cold Springs Rancheria 

of Mono Indians of California, the North 

Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of 

California, the Picayune Rancheria of 

Chukchansi Indians of California, the 

Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi 

Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain 

Rancheria of California, the Tejon 

Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian 

Tribe of the Tule River Reservation. We 

note that none of the tribes located in 

the SJV nonattainment area has 

requested eligibility to administer 

programs under the Clean Air Act. This 

final action affects the EPA’s 

implementation of the new source 

review program because of the lower 

‘‘major stationary source’’ threshold 

triggered by reclassification (CAA 

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

affect new or modified stationary 

sources proposed in these areas that 

require federal permits, approvals, or 

funding. Such projects are subject to the 

requirements of the EPA’s General 

Conformity rule, and federal permits, 

approvals, or funding for the projects 

may be more difficult to obtain because 

of the lower de minimis thresholds 

triggered by reclassification. 

Given these potential implications, 

consistent with the EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, the EPA contacted tribal 

officials early in the process of 

developing this action to permit them to 

have meaningful and timely input into 

its development. The EPA invited tribal 

officials to consult during the 

development of the proposed rule and 

following signature of the proposed 

rule. As discussed in more detail in our 

proposed action, we sent letters to 

leaders of the tribes with areas of Indian 

country in the SJV nonattainment area 

inviting government-to-government 

consultation on the rulemaking effort. 

On February 17, 2015, the EPA received 

a letter dated January 30, 2015 from the 

Tejon Tribe requesting information 

about the proposed reclassification. The 

EPA subsequently invited the Tejon 

Tribe several times to participate in a 

conference call but received no response 

from the Tribe. No other Indian tribe has 

expressed an interest in discussing this 

action with the EPA. We continue to 

invite Indian tribes in the SJV to contact 

the EPA with any questions about the 

effects of this reclassification on tribal 

interests and air quality. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that the EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it reclassifies the SJV 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers additional 

Serious area planning requirements 

under the CAA. This action does not 

establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This final action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, because it is not 

a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This action is not subject to the 

requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

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

272 note) because it does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA believes the human health or 

environmental risk addressed by this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or indigenous 

populations. This action reclassifies the 

SJV nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, which triggers additional 

Serious area planning requirements 

under the CAA. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. The EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
3000 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Register. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the 

Federal Register. This action is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). This rule will be effective on 

February 19, 2016. 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by March 21, 2016. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Incorporation 

by reference, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

Dated: December 22, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9. 

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.245 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) and adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 52.245 New Source Review rules. 

* * * * * 

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

Review rules for PM2.5 for the San 

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District must be revised and 

submitted as a SIP revision. The rules 

must satisfy the requirements of 

sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) and all 

other applicable requirements of the 

Clean Air Act for implementation of the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

* * * * * 

(e) By February 21, 2017, the New 

Source Review rules for PM2.5 for the 

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District must be 

revised and submitted as a SIP revision. 

The rules must satisfy the requirements 

of sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) and all 

other applicable requirements of the 

Clean Air Act for implementation of the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

■ 3. Section 52.247 is amended by 

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 52.247 Control Strategy and regulations: 

Fine Particle Matter. 

* * * * * 

(e) By August 21, 2017, California 

must adopt and submit a Serious Area 

plan to provide for attainment of the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin 

Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area. The 

Serious Area plan must include 

emissions inventories, an attainment 

demonstration, best available control 

measures, a reasonable further progress 

plan, quantitative milestones, 

contingency measures, and such other 

measures as may be necessary or 

appropriate to provide for attainment of 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date, in 

accordance with the requirements of 

subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the 

Clean Air Act. 

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS 

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

PURPOSES 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 5. Section 81.305 is amended in the 

table titled ‘‘California—2006 24-Hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and 

secondary],’’ by revising the entries 

under ‘‘San Joaquin Valley, CA’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.305 California. 

* * * * * 

CALIFORNIA—2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS 

[Primary and secondary] 

Designated area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

*******

San Joaquin Valley, CA: 

Fresno County ........................................................................ Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

Kern County (part) .................................................................. Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 3001 

CALIFORNIA—2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS—Continued 

[Primary and secondary] 

Designated area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

That portion of Kern County which lies west and north 

of a line described as follows: Beginning at the KernLos Angeles County boundary and running north and 

east along the northwest boundary of the Rancho La 

Libre Land Grant to the point of intersection with the 

range line common to R. 16 W. and R. 17 W., San 

Bernardino Base and Meridian; north along the range 

line to the point of intersection with the Rancho El 

Tejon Land Grant boundary; then southeast, northeast, and northwest along the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant to the northwest corner of S. 

3, T. 11 N., R. 17 W.; then west 1.2 miles; then north 

to the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant boundary; then 

northwest along the Rancho El Tejon line to the 

southeast corner of S. 34, T. 32 S., R. 30 E., Mount 

Diablo Base and Meridian; then north to the northwest corner of S. 35, T. 31 S., R. 30 E.; then northeast along the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon Land 

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

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

31 S., R. 31 E.; then north along the range line common to R. 31 E. and R. 32 E., Mount Diablo Base 

and Meridian, to the northwest corner of S. 6, T. 29 

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

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

common to R. 31 E. and R. 32 E. to the northwest 

corner of S. 6, T. 28 S., R. 32 E., then west to the 

southeast corner of S. 36, T. 27 S., R. 31 E., then 

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

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

Kings County ........................................................................... Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

Madera County ....................................................................... Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

Merced County ........................................................................ Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

San Joaquin County ............................................................... Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

Stanislaus County ................................................................... Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

Tulare County ......................................................................... Nonattainment .......... February 19, 

2016.

Serious. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–00739 Filed 1–19–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 174 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0457; FRL–9939–49] 

VNT1 Protein in Potato; Amendment to 

a Temporary Exemption From the 

Requirement of a Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

temporary exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the VNT1 protein in or on potatoes 

when used as a plant-incorporated 

protectant in accordance with the terms 

of Experimental Use Permit (EUP) 

(8917–EUP–2). J.R. Simplot Company 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting an amendment of 

the temporary tolerance exemption. 

This regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of VNT1 protein in potato. 

The temporary tolerance exemption 

expires on April 1, 2017, concurrent 

with the EUP (8917–EUP–2). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

January 20, 2016. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before March 21, 2016, and must 

be filed in accordance with the 

instructions provided in 40 CFR part 

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0457, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES