Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 91263 

1 89 FR 55896 (July 8, 2024). 

2 Id. 

3 89 FR 55901 (July 8, 2024). 

4 89 FR 55896 and 89 FR 55901. 

the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation 

with the Secretary of State. 

To further address the unusual and 

extraordinary threat to the national security, 

foreign policy, and economy of the United 

States described in E.O. 12957 of March 15, 

1995 (‘‘Prohibiting Certain Transactions With 

Respect to the Development of Iranian 

Petroleum Resources’’) and E.O. 13902, and 

in consultation with the Department of State, 

I hereby determine that section 1(a)(i) of E.O. 

13902 shall apply to the petroleum and 

petrochemical sectors of the Iranian 

economy. Any person determined to operate 

in these sectors shall be subject to sanctions 

pursuant to section 1(a)(i). 

This determination shall take effect on 

October 11, 2024. 

Janet L. Yellen, 

Secretary, U.S. Department of the Treasury. 

Lisa M. Palluconi, 

Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets 

Control. 

[FR Doc. 2024–26800 Filed 11–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250 and EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0301; FRL–12006–02–R9] 

Air Plan Approval and Attainment Date 

Extension; 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area; 

San Joaquin Valley, California 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of 

a state implementation plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

California to meet Clean Air Act (CAA 

or ‘‘Act’’) requirements for the 1997 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 

or ‘‘standards’’) in the San Joaquin 

Valley ‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment area. 

The EPA is also finalizing a one-year 

extension of the applicable attainment 

date from December 31, 2023, to 

December 31, 2024, for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, 

nonattainment area based on our 

evaluation of air quality monitoring data 

and the extension request and 

supporting information submitted by 

the State of California. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 19, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established 

dockets for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250 and 

EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301. All 

documents in the dockets are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. If 

you need assistance in a language other 

than English or if you are a person with 

a disability who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ashley Graham, Geographic Strategies 

and Modeling Section (AIR–2–2), EPA 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972– 

3877; email: graham.ashleyr@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Summary of the Proposed Actions 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

A. Comments From CCAC 

B. Comments From Santa Rosa Rancheria 

Tachi Yokut Tribe 

III. Environmental Justice Considerations 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of the Proposed Actions 

On July 8, 2024, the EPA proposed 

two actions related to the CAA 

requirements for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley 

Serious nonattainment area. 

In the first action, under CAA section 

110(k)(3), the EPA proposed to approve 

through parallel processing the 

‘‘Amendments to the 15 mg/m3 SIP 

Revision and Agricultural Equipment 

Incentive Measure for the 1997 PM2.5

Standard’’ (‘‘15 mg/m3 Plan 

Amendments’’) as a revision to the 

California SIP.1 The 15 mg/m3 Plan 

Amendments seek to amend a SIPapproved measure, the ‘‘Accelerated 

Turnover of Agricultural Equipment 

Incentive Projects’’ (‘‘Valley Incentive 

Measure’’), to include a quantification of 

the emissions reductions for the year 

2023 from existing agricultural 

equipment projects from the California 

Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Carl 

Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards 

Attainment Program (‘‘Carl Moyer’’) and 

CARB’s Funding Agricultural 

Replacement Measures for Emission 

Reductions (FARMER) program and 

seek EPA approval of those emission 

reductions for SIP credit. The 15 mg/m3

Plan Amendments also seek to revise 

the aggregate tonnage commitment in 

the attainment plan for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., the ‘‘Attainment 

Plan Revision for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

Standard’’ (‘‘15 mg/m3 SIP Revision’’)) 

by replacing it with a commitment to 

achieve the same reductions from the 

Valley Incentive Measure. As part of the 

EPA’s proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3

Plan Amendments, we proposed to 

approve the State’s demonstration that 

the Valley Incentive Measure has 

achieved emissions reductions of 5.0 

tons per day (tpd) of nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and 0.27 tpd of direct PM2.5 in the 

year 2023, and proposed to credit the 

reductions as a substitute measure to 

meet the aggregate tonnage commitment 

in the 15 mg/m3 SIP Revision.2

In the second action, based in part on 

our proposal to approve the 15 mg/m3

Plan Amendments, the EPA proposed to 

grant California’s request for a one-year 

extension of the applicable attainment 

date from December 31, 2023, to 

December 31, 2024, for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 San Joaquin Valley, California, 

nonattainment area.3 The proposed 

action to extend the applicable 

attainment date for this nonattainment 

area was based on the EPA’s evaluation 

of air quality monitoring data and 

extension request submitted by the State 

of California, and our determination that 

the State has satisfied the two statutory 

criteria for a one-year extension under 

CAA section 172(a)(2)(C): The State has 

complied with all requirements and 

commitments pertaining to the area in 

the applicable implementation plan, 

and in accordance with guidance 

published by the Administrator, no 

more than the minimal number of 

exceedances of the relevant national 

ambient air quality standard has 

occurred in the area in the year 

preceding the Extension Year. 

For details regarding the EPA’s 

reasons for proposing to approve the 15 

mg/m3 Plan Amendments and to grant 

the one-year extension, please see the 

July 8, 2024 proposal notices.4

On August 22, 2024, California 

submitted the final version of the 15 mg/ 

m3 Plan Amendments to the EPA as a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
91264 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

5Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. 

Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with 

enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 

2024 and supplement submitted electronically 

October 7, 2024). 6CARB, ‘‘Notice of Public Meeting to Consider 

the San Joaquin Valley 2024 State Implementation 

Plan for the 2012 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard, 

to Consider Amendments to the Agricultural 

Equipment Incentive Measure and the 1997 15 mg/ 

m3 State Implementation Plan Revision, and to Hear 

an Implementation Update on the 2018 PM2.5 Plan,’’ 

dated June 14, 2024. 7 J&K Court Reporting, LLC, ‘‘Meeting, State of 

California, Air Resources Board, Zoom Platform,’’ 

July 25, 2024 (transcript of CARB’s public hearing), 

and CARB, ‘‘Board Meeting Comments Log and 

Comments posted that were presented during the 

Hearing’’ (written comments received). 8Anonymous comment received July 20, 2024, to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301; and 

anonymous comment received July 27, 2024, to 

Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0301. 9Comment letter dated and received August 7, 

2024, from Dennis Tristao to Docket No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0301. 

10Email dated June 28, 2024, including an 

attachment, from Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA 

Region IX. 

11Comment letter dated and received August 5, 

2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, 

to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 9. 

12The three sets of comments supporting our 

proposal include those from an anonymous 

commenter received July 27, 2024, those from 

CARB, and those from the private citizen. 

13The two sets of comments that are not germane 

to our proposal include those from an anonymous 

commenter received July 20, 2024, and those from 

the environmental consultant. 

14https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09- 

OAR-2024-0301/comments. 

15Email dated June 28, 2024, including an 

attachment, from Shawn Dolan to Lily Lee, EPA 

Region IX; comment letter dated and received 

August 7, 2024, from Dennis Tristao to Docket No. 

EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250; comment received July 

27, 2024, with attachment, from Emily Brandt to 

Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250. 

16Comment received July 26, 2024, from Ian 

Faloona, UC Davis Air Quality Research Center/ 

Land, Air, & Water Resources Department, titled 

‘‘Comments on ‘Review of San Joaquin Valley 2024 

Plan for the 12 mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard’ by 

CARB, June 14, 2024.’’ 

17Comment letter dated July 23, 2024, and 

received July 29, 2024, from Leo Sisco, Tribal 

Chairman, Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, 

to Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX. 

18Comment letter dated and received August 7, 

2024, from Ben Cantu, Chair, Citizens Advisory 

Committee, to EPA Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR– 

2024–0250, Subject: ‘‘RE: Docket No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0250, Attainment Date Extension for the 

San Joaquin Valley, California 1997 Annual PM2.5

Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area.’’ 

19Comment letter dated and received August 5, 

2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, 

to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 9. 

20Comment letter dated and received August 6, 

2024, from Sheraz Gill, Deputy APCO, SJVUAPCD, 

to Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250, Subject: 

‘‘RE: Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0250, 

Attainment Date Extension for the San Joaquin 

Valley, California 1997 Annual PM2.5 Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area.’’ 21Comment letter dated and received August 7, 

2024, including an attachment, to Ashley Graham, 

EPA Region 9. The eight environmental and 

community organizations, in order of appearance in 

the letter, are the Central California Asthma 

Collaborative, the Central California Environmental 

Justice Network, the Central Valley Air Quality 

Coalition, Earthjustice, the LEAP Institute, the 

Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, 

Little Manila Rising, and Sierra Club Tehipite 

Chapter. 

22https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09- 

OAR-2024-0250/comments. 

23The four sets of comments supporting our 

proposal include those from the private citizen 

commenter received August 7, 2024, those from the 

Citizens Advisory Committee, those from CARB, 

and those from SJVUAPCD. 

24The three sets of comments that are not 

germane to our action include those from the 

private citizen commenter received on June 28, 

2024, those received from a private citizen 

commenter on July 27, 2024, and those from the 

university professor. 

25One of the comments titled ‘‘Comments on 

‘Review of San Joaquin Valley 2024 Plan for the 12 

mg/m3 Annual PM2.5 Standard’ by CARB, June 14, 

2024’’ concerns PM2.5 concentrations in San Joaquin 

Valley; however, the title of the comment and the 

analysis therein indicates that it is directed at the 

State’s attainment plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. The comment presents evidence that 

purports to show that the State’s attainment 

modeling for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is 

flawed; however such modeling is not relevant to 

this action that concerns whether the State has met 

the requirements for a one-year extension of the 

attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Thus, the comment is not germane to this action 

and does not necessitate any further response at this 

time. The EPA will review the State’s attainment 

plan for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 

compliance with the requirements of the CAA and 

the EPA’s regulations, and will determine, 

following notice-and-comment rulemaking, whether 

the submission satisfies all applicable CAA 

requirements. We encourage the commenter to 

resubmit these comments as appropriate during 

such a future rulemaking. 

revision to the California SIP.5 We have 

reviewed this submittal and find that it 

fulfills the SIP completeness criteria of 

40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The SIP 

submission also includes evidence that 

adequate public notice was given and 

that an opportunity for a public hearing 

was provided consistent with the EPA’s 

implementing regulations in 40 CFR 

51.102. Specifically, CARB provided 

public notice and opportunity for public 

comment prior to its July 25, 2024 

public hearing on and adoption of the 

15 mg/m3 Plan Amendments.6 The SIP 

submission includes proof of 

publication notices for the public 

hearing and includes copies of the 

written and oral comments received 

during the State’s public review 

processes and CARB’s responses 

thereto.7 Therefore, we find that the 15 

mg/m3 Plan Amendments meet the 

procedural requirements for public 

notice and hearing in CAA sections 

110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

The public comment period for the 

proposed rulemakings opened on July 8, 

2024, the date of publication of both 

proposals in the Federal Register, and 

closed on August 7, 2024. During this 

period, the EPA received five comment 

submissions in response to the proposal 

to approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan 

Amendments, including two comment 

submissions from anonymous 

commenters,8 one comment submission 

from a private citizen,9 one comment 

from an environmental consultant,10

and one comment letter from CARB.11

Three of the five comment submissions 

generally supported our proposal to 

approve the 15 mg/m3 Plan 

Amendments 12 and the remaining two 

comments were not germane to our 

action.13 We did not receive any 

comments that opposed EPA’s proposed 

approval of the 15 mg/m3 Plan 

Amendments. All five comments are 

included in the docket for the proposed 

action.14

The EPA received nine comment 

submissions in response to the proposal 

to grant the one-year extension of the 

attainment date for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, including three 

comment submissions from private 

citizens; 15 a comment submission from 

a university professor; 16 a comment 

submission from the Santa Rosa 

Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe (‘‘Santa 

Rosa Rancheria’’); 17 a comment 

submission from the Citizens Advisory 

Committee, a group representing 

industry, environmental, and city 

interests in the San Joaquin Valley; 18 a 

comment submission from CARB; 19 a 

comment submission from the San 

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District (SJVUAPCD or 

‘‘District’’); 20 and a comment 

submission from a coalition of eight 

environmental and community 

organizations (collectively referred to 

herein as ‘‘Central California Asthma 

Collaborative’’ or CCAC).21 All nine 

comment submissions are included in 

the docket for the proposed action.22 Of 

the nine comment submissions 

provided in response to the proposal to 

grant the one-year extension of the 

attainment date for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, four of the comments 

generally support the EPA’s proposal to 

grant the extension 23 and three of the 

comments were not germane to our 

action.24 25 The supportive and nongermane comments do not require a 

response. We respond to the remaining 

two sets of comments received on our 

July 8, 2024 proposed rule herein. 

A. Comments From CCAC 

Comment 1: CCAC comments that the 

Valley has a history of poor air quality 

and of failing to attain the various 

NAAQS by their respective deadlines. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 91265 

26 89 FR 55901, 55909. 

27CAA section 172(a)(2)(C). 

28For information about how the EPA calculates 

design values, see 40 CFR 50.7 and 40 CFR part 50, 

Appendix N, section 4.1(b). 

29 89 FR 55901, 55909. 

30EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP480, 

accessed May 17, 2024 (User ID: STSAI, Report 

Request ID: 2193813). 

31Exceptional Events are unusual or naturally 

occurring events that can affect air quality but are 

not reasonably controllable using techniques that 

tribal, state or local air agencies may implement in 

order to attain and maintain the NAAQS. 

Exceptional events may include wildfires, high 

wind dust events, prescribed fires, stratospheric 

ozone intrusions, and volcanic and seismic 

activities. 

32 In the May 14, 2024, letter submitting 

documentation to support the State’s request for an 

attainment date extension, the District noted that 

they and CARB ‘‘are evaluating potential 

documentation to remove exceptional events 

(including wildfire impacts) from the 2021–2023 

period, as allowed under the CAA and EPA 

policies.’’ Letter dated May 14, 2024, from Samir 

Sheikh, Executive Director/APCO, SJVUAPCD, to 

Steven S. Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, Subject: 

‘‘RE: Attainment Date Extension for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 Standard for the San Joaquin Valley 

Nonattainment Area.’’ 

33 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015). 

34 81 FR 84481 (November 23, 2016). 

35CAA section 189(d). 

36 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016). 

Citing PM2.5 design values for 2018– 

2020, 2019–2021, and 2020–2022 of 

17.6 mg/m3, 17.8 mg/m3, and 18.8 mg/m3, 

CCAC claims that PM2.5 concentrations 

have not improved and remain well 

above the 15 mg/m3 level of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. CCAC also states 

that ‘‘EPA [has] correctly recognized the 

environmental injustice San Joaquin 

Valley residents endure’’ and 

summarizes findings from the EPA’s 

prior environmental justice (EJ) analyses 

for the area. 

Response 1: The EPA acknowledges 

that there are communities with EJ 

concerns in the San Joaquin Valley and 

does not dispute the challenges 

associated with attaining the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS in this area. We 

also acknowledge that the Demographic 

Index analysis the EPA discussed in the 

proposal to grant the extension of the 

attainment date indicates that the 

indices that reflect the area’s percent 

minority and percent low-income 

populations are above the national 

averages for those indices.26

Nevertheless, the CAA provides states 

the opportunity to request an extension 

of the applicable attainment date for a 

nonattainment area if they meet certain 

statutory criteria, including that the area 

met the air quality standard in question 

in the year leading up to the applicable 

attainment date.27

CCAC also expressed concern that 

PM2.5 concentrations in the Valley have 

not improved in recent years, and that 

this pattern should weigh against the 

extension of the attainment date. The 

EPA must assess whether to grant the 

attainment date extension in light of the 

statutory criteria. We note that CCAC 

relies on design values 28 to evaluate the 

pace of improvement in the area. 

However, design values, which reflect 

the annual average over a three-year 

period, are not the metric that EPA uses 

to determine whether a state qualifies 

for a one-year attainment date 

extension. Rather, pursuant to section 

172(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the EPA looks to 

the monitor data in the year leading up 

to the attainment date (i.e., in this case, 

calendar year 2023) to assess an area’s 

recent progress. As discussed in the 

proposal to grant the one-year extension 

of the attainment date, the EPA 

reviewed 2023 annual mean 

concentrations at each of the regulatory 

monitoring sites in the San Joaquin 

Valley and determined that such data 

indicate that PM2.5 concentrations were 

below the 15.0 mg/m3 level of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS.29

Moreover, 2023 annual mean 

concentrations were lower than annual 

mean concentrations in 2021 and 2022, 

indicating an improvement in air 

quality conditions in 2023 relative to 

previous years.30 This is true even 

without considering potential impacts 

from any exceptional events during that 

timeframe.31 32

The EPA notes that while this final 

action extends the attainment date for 

the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS to December 31, 

2024, the area will remain classified as 

Serious nonattainment for those 

NAAQS and is not relieved of any 

planning obligations under the CAA. 

Following the December 31, 2024 

attainment date, the State and the EPA 

will assess whether the area has attained 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If the 

area has met the NAAQS, the EPA will 

make a determination that the area 

attained by the attainment date. If the 

area has not met the NAAQS, the State 

may request a second one-year 

extension if the area meets the CAA 

requirements for such an extension. If 

the State does not qualify for, or the 

EPA denies a request for, a second oneyear extension under CAA section 172, 

then the EPA will issue a finding of 

failure to attain and the State will 

become subject to additional CAA 

requirements to achieve attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

San Joaquin Valley area. 

Comment 2.A: CCAC asserts that the 

EPA does not have authority to grant a 

one-year extension of the attainment 

date for the San Joaquin Valley for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS under CAA 

section 172(a)(2)(C). Specifically, CCAC 

notes that subpart 4 of Part D of Title I 

of the Act provides for attainment date 

extensions for PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas under specific circumstances 

under section 188, and thus section 188 

controls the question of whether the 

EPA can grant an attainment date 

extension for a Serious PM2.5

nonattainment area that fails to attain by 

the applicable attainment date. CCAC 

asserts that attainment date extensions 

for Serious nonattainment areas are 

addressed by CAA section 188(e), that 

California did not request such an 

extension, and that therefore such 

extension is not available at this time to 

the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Response 2.A: The EPA disagrees 

with the commenter that the attainment 

date extension provisions under CAA 

section 188 control the present action. 

As CCAC accurately explains, the 

EPA reclassified the San Joaquin Valley 

as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS effective May 7, 

2015.33 The following year, the EPA 

found that the San Joaquin Valley failed 

to attain by the applicable Serious 

attainment date and that sections 179(d) 

and 189(d) of the CAA governed all 

subsequent plan requirements and 

attainment deadlines.34

Crucially, following a finding of 

failure to attain for a Serious PM2.5

nonattainment area, CAA section 189(d) 

does not provide for a specific 

attainment date, and it instead requires: 

[T]he State in which such area is located 

shall, after notice and opportunity for public 

comment, submit within 12 months after the 

applicable attainment date, plan revisions 

which provide for attainment of the [PM2.5] 

air quality standard and, from the date of 

such submission until attainment for an 

annual reduction in [PM2.5] or [PM2.5] 

precursor emissions within the area of not 

less than 5 percent of the amount of such 

emissions as reported in the most recent 

inventory prepared for such area.35

With respect to the new applicable 

attainment date for an area governed by 

CAA section 189(d), the EPA explained 

in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule 36

that: 

[T]he final rule includes the overarching 

requirement for a Serious area that failed to 

attain by the previous attainment date to 

establish a new date for attaining the 

standard as expeditiously as practicable. 

However, neither CAA section 189(d) nor 

other sections in subpart 4 explicitly 

establish or provide the authority to establish 

a new attainment date for the area. Therefore, 

once an area is beyond the attainment dates 

that Congress specified in subpart 4 for the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
91266 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

37 Id. at 58106. 

38 81 FR 84481, 84482. 

39 89 FR 55901, 55904. 

40 Id. 

41 ‘‘Following a January 4, 2013 decision of the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit . . . the 

EPA acknowledged that states must meet both 

subpart 1 and subpart 4 requirements in 

nonattainment plan SIP submissions for the 1997 

24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS.’’ Id. at 55903. 

42See, e.g., 72 FR 31183 (June 6, 2007) (finding 

that the Phoenix PM10 Serious nonattainment area 

failed to attain the standard by the December 31, 

2006 attainment deadline and implementing the 

new attainment date for an attainment plan under 

CAA section 189(d) pursuant to sections 172 and 

179). 

43 I.e., the nonattainment area must attain the 

relevant standard as expeditiously as practicable, 

but no later than 5 years from date of designation, 

with the possibility of setting the date 10 years from 

the date of designation under certain circumstances, 

and with the possibility of additional extensions of 

two one-year periods under CAA section 

172(a)(2)(C). 

PM10 NAAQS, the EPA must look to other 

provisions of part D of the CAA to provide 

authority for a new attainment date. Sections 

179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2) of the CAA provide 

generally applicable attainment dates that fill 

the gap in the statute left for areas subject to 

the requirements of CAA section 189(d). 

Thus, for a PM2.5 nonattainment area subject 

to CAA section 189(d) requirements, the EPA 

must establish a new attainment date 

according to the provisions of CAA section 

179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2). The EPA has 

followed this same approach in the past for 

PM10 nonattainment areas governed by 

subpart 4 nonattainment requirements.37

Thus, subpart 4 controls the 

requirements for an attainment plan 

under CAA section 189(d); however, 

after a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area 

fails to attain by the attainment date, the 

applicable attainment date for a Serious 

PM2.5 nonattainment area subject to the 

requirements of CAA section 189(d) is 

controlled by the generally applicable 

provisions in subpart 1 of part D, CAA 

section 172. 

Contrary to the commenter’s 

assertion, section 172 explicitly 

provides for the extension that the EPA 

is finalizing as part of this action. The 

commenter cites CAA section 

172(a)(2)(D), which states, ‘‘[t]his 

paragraph shall not apply with respect 

to nonattainment areas for which 

attainment dates are specifically 

provided under other provisions of this 

part.’’ But as explained above, the 

attainment date for an attainment plan 

required under CAA section 189(d) is 

not specifically provided under the 

provisions in subpart 4, which is why 

the EPA relied on section 172 in setting 

the December 31, 2023 attainment date 

for the San Joaquin Valley.38

Because CAA section 172 controls for 

purposes of setting an attainment date 

for a plan required under CAA section 

189(d), it is logical and reasonable that 

the generally applicable provisions in 

section 172 would control an extension 

of that attainment date in the absence of 

any specific authority in subpart 4 for 

such extensions. 

Comment 2.B: CCAC claims that the 

EPA evaluates the State’s request for an 

attainment date extension pursuant to 

EPA guidance on the implementation of 

CAA section 188(d), which concerns 

attainment date extensions for Moderate 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas, and asserts 

that the EPA does not have authority to 

apply such provisions to a Serious PM2.5

nonattainment area. 

Response 2.B: The EPA is not granting 

the extension pursuant to section 188(d) 

of the Act. Rather, because section 

172(a)(2)(C) does not have PM-specific 

provisions and because the EPA has not 

issued guidance on how to implement 

the provisions of section 172(a)(2)(C) 

relevant to this particular question of 

the criteria for an extension of the 

attainment date for an PM2.5

nonattainment area subject to section 

189(d), the EPA looked to guidance on 

the extension provisions for particulate 

matter nonattainment areas under CAA 

section 188(d) in the PM2.5 SIP 

Requirements Rule, given that ‘‘section 

188(d) is nearly identical to CAA 

section 172(a)(2)(C).’’ 39 While we did 

not assert that 188(d) controls in this 

situation, we did ‘‘consider[ ] the 

guidance pertaining to the one-year 

extension requirements under CAA 

section 188(d) to persuasively inform 

the requirements for a one-year 

extension for a particulate matter 

nonattainment area under CAA section 

172(a)(2)(C).’’ 40

Comment 2.C: CCAC further claims 

that ‘‘[t]he D.C. Circuit has rejected 

EPA’s attempt to implement the PM2.5

standard under Subpart 1.’’ 

Response 2.C: The EPA disagrees with 

the commenter that reliance on the 

generally applicable provisions in CAA 

section 172 to fill a gap in subpart 4 

indicates that the EPA is improperly 

implementing a PM2.5 NAAQS under 

subpart 1. To the contrary, the EPA 

implements the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

accordance with the relevant provisions 

of both subpart 1 and subpart 4, and 

subpart 1 provisions continue to apply 

unless specifically overridden or revised 

by subpart 4. As we stated in our 

proposal, the EPA does not dispute that 

section 189(d) is the controlling 

provision for Serious areas that, like the 

San Joaquin Valley, fail to attain a PM2.5

NAAQS by the applicable attainment 

date.41 Instead, the EPA is 

implementing the PM2.5 standard under 

subpart 4 and subpart 1, in keeping with 

EPA’s longstanding interpretation that 

the statutory provisions of CAA sections 

172(c)(2) and 179(d)(3) govern the 

attainment date for new plans required 

under CAA section 189(d) for areas that 

previously failed to attain by the Serious 

area attainment date.42

Comment 2.D: CCAC asserts that the 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule and the 

EPA’s implementing regulations under 

40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibit California 

from requesting an extension of the 

December 31, 2023 applicable 

attainment deadline, and thus EPA 

approval of this one-year extension 

request would violate the EPA’s own 

implementing regulations and is 

arbitrary and capricious. 

Response 2.D: The EPA disagrees that 

40 CFR 51.1005(c) prohibits the 

proposed attainment date extension. 

The EPA’s regulations under 40 CFR 

51.1005 concern extensions of the 

applicable attainment date for Moderate 

and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas. 

Applicable attainment dates for PM2.5

nonattainment areas are initially set 

under 40 CFR 51.1004, and 40 CFR 

51.1004(a)(1) and (a)(2) follow the 

mandates in CAA sections 188(c)(1) and 

(c)(2), the CAA sections governing the 

setting of Moderate and Serious 

attainment dates, respectively. Likewise, 

40 CFR 51.1005(a) and (b) follow the 

requirements of CAA sections 188(d) 

and (e), respectively, as the primary 

sections governing extensions of the 

applicable attainment date for Moderate 

and Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas. 

In contrast, the authority for the 

requirements in 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3) 

governing nonattainment areas subject 

to CAA section 189(d) for failure to 

attain by the applicable Serious area 

attainment date comes from CAA 

section 172(a)(2)(C), not section 188. As 

explained in Response 2.A, CAA section 

172 controls for purposes of setting an 

attainment date for a plan required 

under CAA section 189(d) because the 

provisions of subpart 4, including 

section 188(c), do not specifically 

provide authority for establishing 

attainment dates for 189(d) attainment 

plans. Because a state required to adopt 

and submit a 189(d) plan is subject to 

the attainment date requirements of 

CAA section 172(a)(2),43 40 CFR 

51.1005(c) prohibits a state subject to 

section 189(d) from applying for an 

extension of the applicable attainment 

date in excess of that which is permitted 

for an attainment plan under section 

189(d). For example, a Serious PM2.5

nonattainment area subject to section 

189(d) may not apply for an extension 

of the applicable attainment date under 

section 188(e). Thus, the EPA believes 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 91267 

44Letter dated August 22, 2024, from Steven S. 

Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, with 

enclosures (submitted electronically August 22, 

2024, and supplement submitted electronically 

October 7, 2024). 

45 89 FR 55901, 55907. 

46EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP435, 

accessed August 20, 2024 (User ID: XLEBARRY, 

Report Request ID: 2217065). 

47 Id. 

48Email dated September 4, 2024, from George 

Bernard, Environmental Director, Santa Rosa 

Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, to Lily Lee, Assistant 

Director, Air & Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, 

with 84 attachments. 

49Regulatory monitoring requires adherence to 40 

CFR parts 50, 53, and 58 and the related appendices 

and the use of designated federal reference or 

federal equivalent methods. 

the proposed attainment date extension, 

which was made in accordance with 

CAA sections 189(d) and 172, is 

consistent with the relevant CAA 

provisions and the EPA’s implementing 

regulations. 

Comment 3: CCAC comments that 

‘‘[i]nstead of proposing to approve an 

illegal and unauthorized one-year 

extension, EPA should have made an 

attainment finding.’’ CCAC asserts that 

the EPA has a duty to make an 

attainment finding within six months of 

the attainment date, citing CAA sections 

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) and that the EPA 

instead proposes to extend the 

attainment date without authority to do 

so. 

Response 3: As explained in 

Responses 1 and 2, we believe a oneyear extension is appropriate in this 

situation and authorized by the CAA if 

a state meets the statutory 

preconditions. In our proposal, the EPA 

proposed to determine that the State has 

satisfied the criteria for a one-year 

extension under CAA section 172 for 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

San Joaquin Valley area, and if finalized 

the EPA would no longer be required 

under CAA section 179(c) to make a 

finding as to whether the area attained 

by the December 31, 2023 attainment 

date. The EPA notes that it will again 

have an obligation under CAA section 

179 to make a determination as to 

whether the San Joaquin Valley attained 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

following the extended December 31, 

2024 attainment date. If the air quality 

data indicate that the San Joaquin 

Valley nonattainment area did not attain 

by the December 31, 2024 attainment 

date, and if the State does not qualify 

for, or the EPA denies a request for, a 

second one-year extension under CAA 

section 172, then the EPA will issue a 

finding of failure to attain at such time 

in accordance with CAA section 179(c). 

B. Comments From Santa Rosa 

Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe 

Comment 4: Santa Rosa Rancheria 

notes that the San Joaquin Valley has 

not attained the standard in nearly three 

decades and opposes an extension due 

to the commenter’s concerns that the 

SIP is not proving effective in bringing 

the area into attainment. 

Response 4: As discussed in Response 

1, the EPA is evaluating the requested 

extension of the attainment date in light 

of the relevant statutory criteria. With 

respect to the air quality criterion of 

CAA section 172(a)(2)(C)(ii), the EPA 

has determined that the 2023 annual 

mean PM2.5 concentration data from 

each of the regulatory monitoring sites 

in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that 

PM2.5 concentrations were below the 

15.0 mg/m3 level of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, reflecting an 

improvement in air quality relative to 

prior years. Based in part on our review 

of these data, we have determined that 

the State has met the requirements 

under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) for a 

one-year extension of the attainment 

date. The EPA will continue to monitor 

the area’s progress towards attainment 

of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 

will make a finding as to whether the 

area attained the NAAQS following the 

applicable extended attainment date. 

Comment 5: Santa Rosa Rancheria 

expresses concern that elevated PM2.5

levels are correlated with premature 

mortality rates, aggravated respiratory 

and cardiovascular disease, changes in 

lung function, and increased respiratory 

and cardiovascular symptoms. 

Response 5: The EPA agrees that 

epidemiological studies have shown 

statistically significant correlations 

between elevated PM2.5 levels and 

adverse health outcomes, including 

premature mortality. While this action 

to approve a SIP revision and grant a 

one-year extension of the attainment 

date is not expected to reduce PM2.5

levels in the San Joaquin Valley, the 

EPA notes that the area is also 

designated nonattainment for the more 

stringent 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

and is subject to additional 

requirements to meet those NAAQS. As 

a result, the State will be continuing its 

efforts to adopt and implement 

additional control measures that will 

continue to improve ambient PM2.5

levels in the San Joaquin Valley. On 

August 22, 2024, California submitted a 

revised attainment plan for the 2012 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS, which includes, 

among other things, the State’s control 

strategy to achieve reductions in direct 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors to bring the 

area into attainment of those NAAQS.44

While the EPA has not yet taken action 

on the revised plan for the 2012 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, we expect that 

implementation of the plan will yield 

additional reductions in PM2.5

concentrations in the San Joaquin 

Valley. 

Comment 6: The Santa Rosa 

Rancheria notes that it monitors its own 

air quality, and based on the data it has 

collected, Santa Rosa Rancheria 

challenges the representativeness of the 

data relied upon by the State and the 

EPA. Santa Rosa Rancheria states that 

‘‘[a]ccording to the Tribe’s Air Quality 

Monitoring Program, from multiple 

locations around the Rancheria, as seen 

in the attachment, the PM2.5 averages 

well above 25 mg/m3. This data is 

reported on the AQS database. Exposure 

levels over 12.0 mg/m3 are considered 

unsafe. The Tribe’s data shows the level 

consistently double that level.’’ 

Response 6: As discussed in our 

proposal, the EPA relies on complete, 

quality-assured data gathered at 

established State and Local Air 

Monitoring Stations in a nonattainment 

area and entered into the EPA Air 

Quality System (AQS) database to 

determine if an area meets the 

requirement under CAA section 

172(a)(2)(C) that the area had clean data 

for the relevant standard in the calendar 

year preceding the applicable 

attainment date.45 In evaluating Santa 

Rosa Rancheria’s comments, the EPA 

has reviewed data collected by the Tribe 

that is available in AQS. These data 

indicate that Santa Rosa Rancheria 

reports data from one monitoring site 

(AQS ID: 06–031–0500) that measures 

ozone, PM10, and several meteorological 

parameters.46 PM2.5 data from this site 

are not available in AQS.47

Santa Rosa Rancheria’s comment 

letter notes an attachment that appeared 

to be inadvertently omitted from the 

comment submission. The EPA 

followed up with Santa Rosa Rancheria 

regarding the data referenced in its 

letter, and in response, Santa Rosa 

Rancheria provided data files to the EPA 

that include PM2.5 data collected by 

monitors on tribal land in 2021 and 

2022.48 We appreciate the Tribe sharing 

PM2.5 data from its monitoring network 

with the EPA. However, because these 

data are not complete, quality-assured 

data collected at regulatory monitoring 

sites that meet EPA requirements 49 and 

report to the EPA’s AQS database, these 

data are not eligible for comparison to 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Furthermore, these data collected in 

2021–2022 were collected outside the 

timeframe relevant for the attainment 

date extension (i.e., 2023). While not 

directly relevant to this particular 

action, the EPA recognizes the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
91268 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

50For more information, see https://

ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/ 

eiareasource/1.%2023RD017%20Public%20Kickoff

%20CARB%20Intro.pdf. 51For more information, see https://

ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/CARB_

Dairy_Sector_Workshop_Staff_Presentation_08-22- 

2024.pdf. 52EJSCREEN provides a nationally consistent 

dataset and approach for combining environmental 

and demographic indicators. EJSCREEN is available 

at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen/what-ejscreen. The 

EPA used EJSCREEN to obtain environmental and 

demographic indicators representing each of the 

eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley. 

53EPA Region IX, ‘‘EJSCREEN Analysis for the 

Eight Counties of the San Joaquin Valley 

Nonattainment Area,’’ August 2022. 

importance of these supplemental data 

and commends the Tribe for its 

collection and use of these data to help 

identify sources and inform real-time 

decision-making to minimize PM2.5

exposures in the community. 

Comment 7: The Tribe asserts that 

research has shown that there is a strong 

correlation between farming and animal 

husbandry and elevated levels of 

ambient PM2.5. The Tribe states that a 

majority of the land in the San Joaquin 

Valley is used for agriculture and that 

because the Tribe is surrounded by 

agriculture, the air quality on Tribal 

land is more representative of the 

nonattainment area than data collected 

in more urban areas. 

Response 7: As discussed in Response 

6, the PM2.5 monitoring data collected 

by Santa Rosa Rancheria does not meet 

the EPA’s regulatory requirements for 

comparison with the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS and were collected outside the 

timeframe relevant for this action. 

Therefore, these data are not directly 

relevant to the EPA’s evaluation of 

whether the State has met the 

requirements for a one-year extension of 

the attainment date for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Regarding the correlation between 

farming and animal husbandry and 

elevated levels of PM2.5, we note that 

CARB and the District are engaged in 

several research efforts to better 

understand the emissions from these 

source categories. For example, in 

spring of 2024, CARB convened a 

subject matter expert review panel to 

evaluate existing data and science on 

NOX and ammonia emissions from soils 

in California.50 CARB has also been 

engaged in compiling California-specific 

dairy activity data and related emissions 

trends.51 While not directly relevant to 

this action, we anticipate that such 

research studies will help inform 

continued efforts to reduce PM2.5

exposures from agricultural activities for 

residents in the San Joaquin Valley. 

III. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

As described in detail in our 

proposals, the EPA reviewed 

environmental and demographic data 

for the San Joaquin Valley using the 

EPA’s EJ screening and mapping tool 

(‘‘EJSCREEN’’) 52 53 and compared the 

data to the corresponding data for the 

United States as a whole. The results of 

the analysis are provided for 

informational and transparency 

purposes and are not a basis for the 

EPA’s action. 

IV. Final Action 

For the reasons discussed in our 

proposed rules and herein, the EPA is 

finalizing our approval of the 15 mg/m3

Plan Amendments as a revision to the 

California SIP. In doing so, we are 

approving the State’s amendment to the 

Valley Incentive Measure for the 

purposes of emissions reductions in 

2023 and the State’s revision to the 

aggregate tonnage commitment in the 15 

mg/m3 SIP Revision to reflect that it has 

been satisfied by the Valley Incentive 

Measure. We are also approving the 

State’s demonstration that the Valley 

Incentive Measure has achieved 

emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX

and 0.27 tpd of direct PM2.5 in the year 

2023 and crediting those reductions 

toward the emissions reduction 

commitment in the California SIP. 

Additionally, in response to a request 

from the State of California on May 23, 

2024, the EPA is granting a one-year 

extension to the applicable attainment 

date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

for the San Joaquin Valley 

nonattainment area. This final action to 

extend the applicable attainment date 

from December 31, 2023, to December 

31, 2024, for this nonattainment area is 

based on the State’s compliance with 

the requirements in the applicable SIP 

for the area and on the 2023 PM2.5

monitoring data from sites in the San 

Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Act. Accordingly, this final action 

merely approves a state plan as meeting 

federal requirements and grants a state 

request for an attainment date extension 

consistent with federal requirements 

and does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For that reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• 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 subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it approves a state program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• 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 CAA. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. Executive Order 

14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) 

builds on and supplements E.O. 12898 

and defines EJ as, among other things, 

‘‘the just treatment and meaningful 

involvement of all people, regardless of 

income, race, color, national origin, or 

Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 91269 

decision-making and other Federal 

activities that affect human health and 

the environment.’’ 

The State did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

Consistent with the EPA’s discretion 

under the CAA, the EPA performed an 

EJ analysis, as is described above in the 

section titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations.’’ The analysis was done 

for the purpose of providing additional 

context and information about this 

rulemaking to the public, not as a basis 

of the action. Due to the nature of the 

action being taken here, this action is 

expected to have a neutral impact on the 

air quality of the affected area. In 

addition, there is no information in the 

record upon which this decision is 

based inconsistent with the stated goal 

of E.O. 12898 of achieving EJ for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

This action is subject to the 

Congressional Review Act, and EPA will 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. This action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of 

the CAA, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 21, 2025. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action 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 in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Ammonia, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: November 2, 2024. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, 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. 

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding and reserving paragraphs 

(c)(620) through (622), and adding 

paragraph (c)(623) to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan—in part. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(620)–(622) [Reserved] 

(623) The following plan revisions 

were submitted electronically on August 

22, 2024, by the Governor’s designee as 

an attachment to a letter of the same 

date. 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional materials. (A) 

California Air Resources Board. 

(1) Selected portions titled 

‘‘Amendments to the 15 mg/m3 SIP 

Revision and Agricultural Equipment 

Incentive Measure for the 1997 PM2.5

Standard,’’ and ‘‘Appendix B: 2022 

Annual Demonstration Report: San 

Joaquin Valley Agricultural Equipment 

Incentive Measure Covering Projects 

Completed Through 12/31/2022,’’ of the 

Staff Report, ‘‘Review of the San Joaquin 

Valley 2024 Plan for the 2012 12 mg/m3

Annual PM2.5 Standard and 

Amendments to the Agricultural 

Equipment Incentive Measure and the 

1997 15 mg/m3 State Implementation 

Plan Revision,’’ adopted July 25, 2024. 

(2) The portion of CARB Resolution 

24–10, dated July 25, 2024, adopting 

amendments to the Valley Incentive 

Measure to include quantification of 

emissions reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX

and 0.27 tpd of PM2.5 in the year 2023 

from existing agricultural equipment 

projects and substituting the reductions 

from the Valley Incentive Measure to 

meet the aggregate emissions reduction 

commitment in the attainment plan for 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

approved in 40 CFR 

52.220(c)(537)(ii)(A)(9). 

(B) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2024–25946 Filed 11–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0545; FRL–12100– 

02–R5] 

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Second 

Period Regional Haze Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the Regional 

Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources 

(Wisconsin or WDNR) on July 30, 2021, 

along with subsequent information 

discussed herein, as satisfying 

applicable requirements under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s 

Regional Haze Rule (RHR) for the 

program’s second implementation 

period. Wisconsin’s SIP submission and 

the subsequent information addresses 

the requirement that states must 

periodically revise their long-term 

strategies for making reasonable 

progress towards the national goal of 

preventing any future, and remedying 

any existing, anthropogenic impairment 

of visibility, including regional haze, in 

mandatory Class I Federal areas. The 

SIP submission also addresses other 

applicable requirements for the second 

implementation period of the regional 

haze program. EPA is taking this action 

pursuant to sections 110 and 169A of 

the CAA. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

December 19, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0545. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov website. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI), Proprietary Business Information 

(PBI), or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either through 

www.regulations.gov or at the 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Charles 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1