87828 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

longer considered a mandatory 

submission; EPA is therefore proposing 

to find that the EPA’s October 23, 2023 

(88 FR 72688), disapproval action 

should not trigger imposition of 

mandatory sanctions under CAA section 

179 and 40 CFR 52.31 or a FIP 

obligation under CAA 110(c)(1)(B). The 

EPA notes that it is not proposing to 

correct the merits of the October 23, 

2023 disapproval nor is it withdrawing 

that disapproval action—the EPA does 

not believe that the substantive basis for 

the disapproval as explained in that 

final action was erroneous; rather, the 

EPA is proposing to find that because 

the SIP submittal itself is no longer 

mandatory following the D.C. Circuit’s 

partial vacatur, the triggering of 

sanctions under section 179 and 40 CFR 

52.31, and the triggering of the EPA’s 

FIP obligation under 110(c)(1)(B), was in 

error. Therefore, if the EPA finalizes this 

error correction action as proposed, the 

imposition of sanctions for the State of 

Delaware and the FIP obligation for the 

EPA that were triggered as result of the 

October 23, 2023 (88 FR 72688), final 

disapproval action would no longer be 

in effect. 

IV. What action is the EPA taking? 

As a result of the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision in Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. 

Power v. EPA, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that, pursuant to section 

110(k)(6) of the CAA, a portion of the 

EPA’s October 23, 2023 (88 FR 72688), 

final disapproval action of Delaware’s 

SIP revision was in error with respect to 

the consequences of that disapproval. 

By partially vacating the EPA’s 2015 

SSM SIP Action, the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision rendered Delaware’s SIP 

submission in response to the 2015 SSM 

SIP action voluntary rather than 

mandatory. Thus, the EPA is proposing 

to find that the triggering of mandatory 

sanctions and FIP obligation following 

the October 23, 2023 (88 FR 72688), 

final disapproval was erroneous and, 

through this action, is proposing to 

terminate the imposition of sanctions 

for the State and the FIP obligation for 

the EPA triggered by that disapproval as 

they are no longer legally valid. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders (E.O.) can 

be found at www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. This action merely corrects an 

error in EPA’s prior action 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 is an error correction taken 

under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA and 

does not directly or disproportionately 

affect children. 

• 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 EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the action does not have 

Tribal implications and 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 

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. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The air agency did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ 

analysis and did not consider EJ in this 

action as the EPA views this action as 

a necessary procedural step following 

the D.C. Circuit decision and vacatur of 

portions of the 2015 SIP call. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of 

achieving environmental justice for 

people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedures, 

Air pollution control, Approval and 

promulgation of implementation plans, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, and 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25457 Filed 11–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0339; FRL–12125– 

01–R9] 

Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Yuma 2015 

8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 87829 

1 ‘‘Fact Sheet—2008 Final Revisions to the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ozone,’’ dated March 2008. 

2See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). 

3See 62 FR 38856. On April 30, 2004, the EPA 

designated and classified areas of the country with 

respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 

23858. 

4 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). 

5Since the primary and secondary 2015 ozone 

standards are the same, we hereafter refer to them 

herein using the singular ‘‘2015 ozone NAAQS’’ or 

‘‘standard.’’ 

6 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). 

7 85 FR 87256 (December 31, 2020). This 

proposed action relates to the requirements for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. Information regarding the 

December 31, 2020 retention of the prior 2015 

ozone NAAQS is provided for reference only. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the State of Arizona’s request to 

redesignate the Yuma nonattainment 

area from nonattainment to attainment 

for the 8-hour national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS or 

‘‘standard’’) for ozone promulgated in 

2015 (‘‘2015 ozone NAAQS’’). The EPA 

is also proposing to approve the ‘‘SIP 

Revision: 2015 Ozone NAAQS, Yuma 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance 

Plan’’ (‘‘Yuma Maintenance Plan’’ or 

‘‘Plan’’) as a revision to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State 

of Arizona. The Yuma Maintenance 

Plan includes, among other elements, an 

emissions inventory consistent with 

attainment, a maintenance 

demonstration, contingency provisions, 

and a motor vehicle emissions budget 

for the first ten-year maintenance 

period. With this proposed rulemaking, 

the EPA is beginning the adequacy 

process for the 2020, 2030, and 2037 

motor vehicle emissions budgets. The 

EPA is proposing these actions because 

this SIP revision meets the applicable 

Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘the Act’’) 

requirements for maintenance plans and 

because the State has met the 

requirements under the Act for 

redesignation of a nonattainment area to 

attainment with respect to the Yuma 

2015 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area 

(‘‘Yuma area’’). 

DATES: Written comments must arrive 

on or before December 5, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0339 at https://

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

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

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 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: 

Andrew Ledezma, Planning and 

Analysis Branch (AIR–2), Air and 

Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105, (415) 972–3985, or by email at 

Ledezma.Andrew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. The 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

B. The Yuma Area and Regulatory Actions 

C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for 

Redesignations and Maintenance Plans 

II. Submissions From the State of Arizona To 

Redesignate the Yuma Area to 

Attainment for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS 

A. Summary of State Submissions 

B. CAA Procedural Requirements for 

Adoption and Submission of SIP 

Revisions 

III. Evaluation of Arizona’s Redesignation 

Request for the Yuma Area 

A. Evaluation of Whether the Yuma Area 

Has Attained the 2015 Ozone NAAQS 

B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved 

SIP Meeting the Requirements 

Applicable for the Purposes of 

Redesignation Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

C. The Area Must Show That the 

Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Emissions 

Reductions 

D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section 

175A 

IV. Proposed Action and Request for Public 

Comment 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

I. Background 

A. The 2015 Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards 

Ground-level ozone pollution is 

formed from the reaction of volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX) in the presence of 

sunlight. These two pollutants, referred 

to as ozone precursors, are emitted by 

many types of sources, including onand nonroad motor vehicles and 

engines, power plants and industrial 

facilities, and smaller area sources such 

as lawn and garden equipment and 

paints. 

Scientific evidence indicates that 

adverse public health effects occur 

following exposure to ozone, 

particularly in children and adults with 

lung disease. Breathing air containing 

ozone can reduce lung function and 

inflame airways, which can increase 

respiratory symptoms and aggravate 

asthma or other lung diseases.1

Under section 109 of the Act, the EPA 

promulgates NAAQS for pervasive air 

pollutants, such as ozone. The NAAQS 

are concentration levels the EPA has 

determined to be requisite to protect 

public health and welfare. On February 

8, 1979, the EPA established primary 

and secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 

parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 

1-hour period.2 On July 18, 1997, the 

EPA revised the primary and secondary 

standards for ozone to set the acceptable 

level of ozone in the ambient air at 

0.080 ppm averaged over an 8-hour 

period (‘‘1997 ozone NAAQS’’).3

In 2008, the EPA lowered the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm (‘‘2008 

ozone NAAQS’’) to revise the 1997 

ozone NAAQS.4 Then, in 2015, the EPA 

lowered the primary and secondary 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm 

(‘‘2015 ozone NAAQS’’ or 

‘‘standard’’ 5).6 Most recently, in 

December 2020, the EPA finalized 

review of the ozone NAAQS, retaining 

the form and level of the standards.7 As 

a result, no new ozone area designations 

were triggered under the CAA, and 

therefore, no new nonattainment area 

requirements will apply. This action 

pertains to only the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. 

B. The Yuma Area and Regulatory 

Actions 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by 

the CAA to promulgate designations for 

areas throughout the U.S. in accordance 

with section 107(a)(1) of the CAA. 

Effective August 3, 2018, the EPA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
87830 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

8 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). 

9CAA section 181(a)(1), 40 CFR 51.1102 and 

51.1103(a). 

10The Yuma nonattainment area is bounded on 

the north and west by the Arizona state line, 

bounded on the south by the line of latitude at 

32°39′20′′ N, bounded on the east by the line of 

longitude 114°33′50′′ W, and excluding the section 

10, 11, and 12 of township T9S, R23W and any 

portion in Indian Country. See 40 CFR 81.303. 

11 89 FR 22963 (April 3, 2024). 

12 87 FR 19629 (April 5, 2022). 

13 87 FR 45657 (July 29, 2022). 

14 87 FR 60897 (October 7, 2022). The design 

value for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is the fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

concentration of ozone averaged over a three-year 

period. 40 CFR part 50, appendix U. 

15 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). 

16 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). 

17Memorandum dated September 4, 1992, from 

John Calcagni, Air Quality Management Division, 

U.S. EPA, to Regional Air Directors, Regions I–X, 

Subject: ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ available at 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-03/ 

documents/calcagni_memo_-_procedures_for_

processing_requests_to_redesignate_areas_to_

attainment_090492.pdf. 

18Memorandum dated October 14, 1994, from 

Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator, U.S. 

EPA, to EPA Regional Air Directors, Region I–X, 

Subject: ‘‘Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) 

Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation 

to Attainment,’’ available at https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/default/files/2015-07/documents/ 

101494m.pdf. 

19Letter dated December 27, 2023, from Hether 

Krause, Deputy Assistant Director, ADEQ, to Martha 

Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. 

established the initial air quality 

designations for most areas in the 

United States for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS.8 The EPA designated the 

Yuma area as ‘‘Marginal’’ nonattainment 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS based on 

monitoring data from 2014–2016. Areas 

classified as Marginal must attain the 

NAAQS within three years of the 

effective date of the nonattainment 

designation.9 The Yuma area covers 52 

square miles in the Sonoran Desert 

region of southwestern Arizona and is 

adjacent to California and the 

international border with Mexico.10 In 

response to the designation and 

classification of the Yuma area as a 

Marginal area, Arizona submitted to the 

EPA revisions to its nonattainment new 

source review (NNSR) program. The 

EPA approved the revisions and 

determined that the NNSR program 

meets the applicable NNSR program 

requirements for areas classified as 

Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS.11 Arizona also 

submitted a plan titled ‘‘Marginal Ozone 

Plan for the Yuma Nonattainment Area’’ 

and a technical supplement which 

address the emissions inventory 

requirement in CAA section 182(a)(1) 

and the emissions statement 

requirement in CAA section 182(a)(3). 

The EPA approved the emissions 

inventory for the Yuma area on April 5, 

2022,12 and the emissions statement on 

July 29, 2022.13

On October 7, 2022, the EPA 

determined that the Yuma area attained 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS by August 3, 

2021, the attainment deadline specified 

by the Act, with a design value of 0.068 

ppm.14 The EPA relied on 2018–2020 

quality-assured, certified ambient ozone 

data in making the determination that 

the Yuma area had attained the NAAQS 

by the applicable date. 

C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements 

for Redesignations and Maintenance 

Plans 

The CAA establishes the criteria that 

must be met for the EPA to redesignate 

a nonattainment area to attainment for 

a given NAAQS. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) sets forth the following 

criteria: (1) the EPA must determine that 

the area has attained the applicable 

NAAQS; (2) the EPA must have a fully 

approved SIP for the area under CAA 

section 110(k); (3) the EPA must 

determine that the improvement in air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions; (4) 

the EPA must have fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A; and, (5) the State must 

have met all requirements applicable to 

the area under section 110 and title I, 

part D (‘‘part D’’) of the CAA. Section 

110 identifies a comprehensive list of 

elements that must be included in SIPs, 

and part D establishes the SIP 

requirements for nonattainment areas. 

Part D is divided into six subparts. The 

generally applicable SIP requirements 

for nonattainment areas are found in 

subpart 1 of part D, and the ozonespecific SIP requirements are found in 

subpart 2 of part D. The EPA provided 

guidance on redesignations in a 

document titled ‘‘State Implementation 

Plans; General Preamble for the 

Implementation of title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 16, 1992,15 and supplemented on 

April 28, 1992 16 (collectively referred to 

herein as the ‘‘General Preamble’’). The 

EPA issued additional guidance in two 

memoranda: a September 4, 1992 

memorandum from John Calcagni, titled 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment’’ 

(‘‘Calcagni memo’’); 17 and a 1995 

memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, 

titled ‘‘Part D New Source Review (part 

D NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment’’ (‘‘Nichols memo’’).18

The EPA’s approval of a State’s 

maintenance plan is one of the CAA 

prerequisites for redesignation of a 

nonattainment area to attainment. 

Section 175A of the CAA provides the 

general framework for a State’s 

maintenance plans. A State’s initial 10- 

year maintenance plan must provide for 

maintenance of the NAAQS for at least 

10 years after redesignation and include 

any additional control measures 

necessary to ensure such maintenance. 

In addition, maintenance plans must 

contain contingency provisions 

necessary to assure the prompt 

correction of a violation of the NAAQS 

during the maintenance period. At a 

minimum, these contingency provisions 

must include a requirement that a State 

will implement all control measures 

contained in the nonattainment SIP 

prior to redesignation. Because a State’s 

maintenance plan submittals are SIP 

revisions, the EPA is obligated under 

CAA section 110(k) to approve them or 

disapprove them depending upon 

whether they meet the applicable CAA 

requirements for such plans outlined 

above. 

For the reasons described in section 

III of this proposal, the EPA is proposing 

to approve the Yuma Maintenance Plan 

and approve Arizona’s request for 

redesignation of the Yuma area to 

attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

The EPA’s proposed approvals are based 

on our conclusion that Arizona has 

satisfied all the criteria under CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E). 

II. Submissions From the State of 

Arizona To Redesignate the Yuma Area 

to Attainment for the 2015 Ozone 

NAAQS 

A. Summary of State Submissions 

On December 27, 2023, the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ) submitted to the EPA its 

redesignation request and the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan as a revision to the 

Arizona SIP.19 This document addresses 

all of the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) 

requirements for redesignating a 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

NAAQS and includes the required 

maintenance plan elements. The Yuma 

Maintenance Plan is organized into 

eight chapters and two appendices. 

Appendix A of the Plan provides 

technical support for the emissions 

inventory, and appendix B of the Plan 

contains the procedural requirements 

and authority to implement the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 87831 

20ADEQ submitted a signed version of its ‘‘Notice 

of Public Hearing’’ published online, and in print 

in The Arizona Republic on November 14 and 15, 

2023 and in the Yuma Sun on November 14, 2023. 

21ADEQ submitted a signed version of the 

‘‘Public hearing presiding officer certification,’’ 

which certifies that ADEQ conducted public 

hearing on December 15, 2023. 

22ADEQ submitted a written transcript of the 

public hearing conducted on December 15, 2023, in 

which the Yuma Maintenance Plan was adopted. 

23For more information regarding the 

completeness criteria as per CAA section 

110(k)(1)(A) and 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, see 

the completeness checklist in the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan, v–viii. 

24 57 FR 13948 at 13563 (April 12, 1992). 

25 40 CFR 58.2(a). 

26 40 CFR 58.16. AQS is the EPA’s national 

repository of ambient air quality data. 

27 40 CFR 58.15(a). 

28 40 CFR part 50, appendix U, section 3. 

29The 2015 ozone NAAQS design value is the 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 

average ozone concentration, averaged over three 

years. 

30Ozone season refers to seasons of the year that 

are conducive to ozone formation, identified on a 

state-by-state basis per 40 CFR part 58, appendix D 

4.1(i), table D–3. The Yuma Maintenance Plan 

identifies their high ozone season as April to 

September. Yuma Maintenance Plan, 9. 

31 40 CFR part 50, appendix U, section 4.b. 

32 40 CFR part 50, appendix U, section 4.c. 

33We have included in the docket for this 

rulemaking, EPA reviews of ADEQ annual network 

plans and the correspondence transmitting this 

review, e.g., from Dena Vallano, Manager, 

Monitoring and Analysis Section, EPA Region IX, 

to Daniel Czecholinski, Air Division Director, 

ADEQ. 

34See e.g., ‘‘Arizona Air Monitoring Network 

Plan for the Year 2023,’’ Tables 2.1–10 and 2.1–11, 

‘‘Minimum Monitoring Requirements for O3.’’ 

B. CAA Procedural Requirements for 

Adoption and Submission of SIP 

Revisions 

CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) 

require a State to provide reasonable 

public notice and opportunity for public 

hearing prior to the adoption and 

submission of a SIP revision to the EPA. 

To meet this procedural requirement, a 

State must include evidence that it 

provided adequate public notice and an 

opportunity for a public hearing, 

consistent with the EPA’s implementing 

regulations in 40 CFR 51.102. 

ADEQ’s December 27, 2023 SIP 

submittal includes documentation of the 

public process conducted by ADEQ in 

its adoption the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan.20 On November 15, 2023, ADEQ 

released a draft version of the plan for 

public review and published a notice of 

public meeting to be held on December 

15, 2023, to consider the adoption of the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan. ADEQ 

adopted the Yuma Maintenance Plan on 

December 15, 2023, following a public 

hearing, as documented in the public 

hearing presiding officer certification 21

and public hearing transcript.22 Based 

on the documentation in the December 

27, 2023 SIP submittal, ADEQ has 

satisfied the applicable statutory and 

regulatory requirements for reasonable 

public notice and hearing prior to 

adoption and submission of the Plan. 

Therefore, the submission of the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan meets the procedural 

requirements for public notice and 

hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and 

110(l) and in 40 CFR 51.102. 

On June 23, 2024, the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan became complete by 

operation of law pursuant to CAA 

section 110(k)(1)(B).23

III. Evaluation of Arizona’s 

Redesignation Request for the Yuma 

Area 

A. Evaluation of Whether the Yuma 

Area Has Attained the 2015 Ozone 

NAAQS 

1. Statutory and Regulatory 

Requirements 

Pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of 

the CAA, for a nonattainment area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the EPA 

must determine that the area has 

attained the relevant NAAQS. The EPA 

interprets this requirement to mean that 

the area must have an attaining design 

value based on the most recently 

available and quality-assured air quality 

monitoring data, collected in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 58.24 These requirements 

include quality assurance procedures 

for monitor operation and data 

handling, siting parameters for 

instruments or instrument probes, and 

minimum ambient air quality 

monitoring network requirements.25

State, local, or Tribal agencies that 

operate air monitoring sites in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 must 

enter the ambient air quality data from 

these sites in the EPA Air Quality 

System (AQS) database.26 These 

monitoring agencies certify annually 

that these data are accurate to the best 

of their knowledge, taking into 

consideration the quality assurance 

findings.27 Accordingly, the EPA relies 

primarily on AQS data when 

determining the attainment status of an 

area. 

In accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix U, the EPA’s finding of 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

must be based upon complete, certified 

data gathered at monitoring sites in the 

nonattainment area in accordance with 

40 CFR part 58 and entered into AQS.28

Under 40 CFR 50.19 and in accordance 

with part 50, appendix U, an area meets 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS when the 

design value at each eligible monitoring 

site within the area is less than or equal 

to 0.070 ppm, based on the calculations 

set forth in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

U.29

To have a valid design value showing 

attainment of the ozone standard at a 

given monitoring site, the ambient air 

quality data must meet data 

completeness or substitution 

requirements for each year under 

consideration. The completeness 

requirements are met when at least 90 

percent of the days in the ozone season 

are complete,30 on average, for the threeyear period, with a minimum of at least 

75 percent of the complete days within 

the ozone monitoring period in any one 

year.31 When computing whether the 

minimum data completeness 

requirements have been met, 

meteorological or ambient data may be 

sufficient to demonstrate that 

meteorological conditions on missing 

days were not conducive to 

concentrations above the level of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. Missing days 

assumed less than the level of the 2015 

ozone NAAQS are counted for the 

purpose of meeting the minimum data 

completeness requirements, subject to 

the approval of the Regional 

Administrator.32

2. Monitoring Network Review, Quality 

Assurance, and Data Completeness 

ADEQ is the governmental agency 

with the authority and responsibilities 

under the State’s laws for collecting 

ambient air quality data in the Yuma 

area. As a result, ADEQ submits annual 

monitoring network plans to the EPA.33

These plans document the status of 

ADEQ’s air monitoring network, as 

required under 40 CFR 58.10. The EPA 

reviews these annual network plans for 

compliance with the specific 

requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With 

respect to ozone, we have found that the 

annual network plans submitted by 

ADEQ met these requirements under 40 

CFR part 58, including the minimum 

monitoring requirements.34 Yuma 

Supersite (AQS ID No. 04–027–8011) is 

the only ozone monitor in the Yuma 

area. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 58.15, 

ADEQ certifies annually that the 

previous years’ ambient concentration 

and quality assurance data are 

completely submitted to AQS and that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
87832 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

35We have included in our docket ADEQ’s 

annual data certifications for 2020–2022. Annual 

data certification requirements can be found at 40 

CFR 58.15. 

36 40 CFR 58.15(c). 

37AQS, Design Value Report (AMP480), dated 

February 21, 2024. 

38 In 2021, the one-point quality control check 

requirement was not met. ADEQ did not complete 

the required number of checks throughout the year. 

However, according to 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, 

section 1.2.3, failure to conduct or pass a required 

check or procedure, or a series of required checks 

or procedures, does not by itself invalidate data for 

regulatory decision making. 

39AQS, Design Value Report (AMP480), dated 

February 21, 2024. 

40 Id. 

41Technical Systems Audit of the Ambient Air 

Monitoring Program: Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality, February 8–12, 2021; Final 

Report dated April 2022 (‘‘2021 TSA’’). The 2021 

TSA is attached to its transmittal letter dated April 

7, 2022, from Elizabeth J. Adams, EPA Region IX, 

to Bradley Busby, Manager, ADEQ. 

42See ‘‘AQS Quicklook Report,’’ dated October 1, 

2024, available in the docket for this proposed rule. 

At the Yuma Supersite, available data for 2024 on 

includes the first and second quarter of the year 

(January through June). Based on that first and 

second quarter, the fourth-highest 8-hour ozone 

concentration so far in 2014 is 0.068 ppm. 

43See the Calcagni memo; memorandum dated 

September 17, 1993, from Michael Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, 

Subject: ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for 

Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after November 

15, 1992,’’; 60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan); 68 

FR 25418, 25424–25427 (May 12, 2003) 

(redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri); and Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) 

(upholding EPA’s redesignation rulemaking 

applying this interpretation). 

the ambient concentration data are 

accurate, taking into consideration the 

quality assurance findings.35 Along with 

the certification letters, ADEQ submits a 

summary of the precision and accuracy 

data for all ambient air quality data.36

The EPA’s evaluations of the relevant 

quality assurance data are reflected in 

the associated AQS design value 

reports.37 These reports include a 

certification evaluation and concurrence 

(‘‘Cert&Eval’’) flag indicating the overall 

quality of the corresponding monitoring 

data. Over the period of 2021–2023, the 

associated Cert&Eval flag in the design 

value report was ‘‘Y’’ for the monitoring 

site in the Yuma area,38 meaning that 

‘‘[t]he certifying agency has submitted a 

certification letter, and EPA has no 

unresolved reservations about data 

quality (after reviewing the letter, the 

attached summary reports, the amount 

of quality assurance data submitted to 

AQS, the quality statistics, and the 

highest reported concentrations).’’ 39

The Yuma area Design Value Report 

also included a validity indicator (‘‘Y’’) 

that reflects whether the design value is 

valid (i.e., calculated using data that 

meet the applicable completeness 

criteria). For the purposes of this 

proposal, we reviewed the data for the 

2021–2023 period for completeness and 

determined that the ozone data 

collected by ADEQ met the 

completeness criterion at the ozone 

monitoring site in the Yuma area.40

Finally, the EPA conducts regular 

technical system audits (TSAs) where 

we review and inspect State and local 

ambient air monitoring programs to 

assess compliance with applicable 

regulations concerning the collection, 

analysis, validation, and reporting of 

ambient air quality data. For the 

purposes of this proposal, we reviewed 

the findings from the EPA’s 2021 TSA 

of ADEQ’s ambient air monitoring 

program.41 In Finding 4 of the 2021 

TSA, the EPA noted that ADEQ did not 

report all valid measurement quality 

checks to AQS as required by the CFR. 

ADEQ conducted nightly zero/ 

precision/span checks on its ozone 

analyzers with certified transfer 

standards but did not report these to 

AQS. In the past, the rationale for not 

reporting these checks was that the 

stability was not tracked or was 

questionable given the limited time for 

the zero/precision/span to occur, (i.e., 

11:45 p.m.–12:15 a.m.). To address this 

finding, as of October 2023, ADEQ has 

begun to submit nightly ozone precision 

checks to AQS. The EPA did not 

recommend invalidating any data from 

the monitoring site in the Yuma area 

based on this TSA. 

In summary, based on the EPA’s 

reviews of the relevant monitoring 

network plans, certifications, quality 

assurance data, and the 2021 TSA, we 

propose to find that the ozone data 

collected in the Yuma area are suitable 

for determining whether the area has 

attained the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

based on the most recent certified data 

available in AQS. 

3. Evaluation of Attainment 

Table 1 shows the calculated 2015 

ozone design values at the Yuma 

Supersite monitor (AQS ID No. 04–027– 

8011). The data show that the monitor 

in the Yuma area met the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS in the 2020–2022 period. In 

addition, preliminary data for 2024 

shows that the Yuma Supersite monitor 

is attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS.42

TABLE 1—YUMA SUPERSITE MONITOR

(AQS ID NO. 04–027–8011) DESIGN VALUE FOR THE 2015 OZONE

NAAQS FROM 2008–2022 

[Parts per million (ppm)] a

Year Design value 

2010 ...................................... 0.073 

2011 ...................................... 0.073 

2012 ...................................... 0.077 

2013 ...................................... 0.076 

2014 ...................................... 0.077 

2015 ...................................... 0.076 

2016 ...................................... 0.074 

2017 ...................................... 0.072 

2018 ...................................... 0.071 

2019 ...................................... 0.071 

2020 ...................................... 0.068 

TABLE 1—YUMA SUPERSITE MONITOR

(AQS ID NO. 04–027–8011) DESIGN VALUE FOR THE 2015 OZONE

NAAQS FROM 2008–2022—Continued 

[Parts per million (ppm)] a

Year Design value 

2021 ...................................... 0.067 

2022 ...................................... 0.068 

2023 ...................................... 0.070 

aSource: AQS, Design Value Report, dated 

May 1, 2024. 

Consequently, based upon three 

complete, quality assured and certified 

data from 2021–2023, the EPA proposes 

to determine that the Yuma area has 

attained and continues to attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. 

B. The Area Must Have a Fully 

Approved SIP Meeting the Requirements 

Applicable for the Purposes of 

Redesignation Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the 

CAA require the EPA to determine that 

the area has a fully approved applicable 

SIP under CAA section 110(k) that 

meets all applicable requirements under 

section 110 and part D for the purposes 

of redesignation. We interpret the 

references to the ‘‘applicable 

implementation plan’’ and ‘‘applicable 

requirements’’ in section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) 

and in 107(d)(3)(E)(v), respectively, to 

mean that a SIP must be fully approved 

only with respect to requirements that 

are applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. The CAA section 110 and 

part D requirements that are linked to a 

particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification (except 

those directly related to attainment) are 

the relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. 

Requirements that apply regardless of 

the designation of an area of a State are 

not applicable requirements for the 

purpose of redesignation, and the State 

will remain subject to these 

requirements after the nonattainment 

area is redesignated to attainment.43 The 

EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 87833 

44Calcagni memo, 3; Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 

438 (6th Cir. 2001). 

45Calcangi memo, 3; 68 FR 25418, 25426 (May 

12, 2003). 

46 89 FR 71830 (September 4, 2024). 

47 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). 

48The requirements can be found in CAA section 

182(a). 

49 87 FR 19629 (April 5, 2022). 

50 87 FR 45657 (July 29, 2022). 

51 89 FR 22963 (April 3, 2024). 

52Calcagni memo, 4. 

53 Yuma Maintenance Plan, 28–32. 

54 Yuma Maintenance Plan, 28–31. 

approving a redesignation request 44 as 

well as any additional measure or 

element it may approve in conjunction 

with a redesignation action.45

1. State Implementation Plan 

Requirements Under Section 110 

The general SIP elements and 

requirements set forth in CAA section 

110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, 

the following: (1) submittal of a SIP that 

has been adopted by the State after 

reasonable public notice and hearing; 

(2) provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

(3) implementation of a source 

permitting program; (4) provisions for 

the implementation of part C 

requirements for prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD); (5) 

provisions for the implementation of 

part D requirements for nonattainment 

new source review permit programs; (6) 

provisions for air pollution modeling; 

and (7) provisions for public and local 

agency participation in planning and 

emission control rule development. 

On numerous occasions, Arizona has 

submitted, and the EPA has approved 

provisions addressing the basic CAA 

section 110 provisions. The Arizona SIP 

contains enforceable emissions 

limitations, requires monitoring, 

compiling, and analyzing of ambient air 

quality data; requires preconstruction 

review of new or modified stationary 

sources; provides for adequate funding, 

staff, and associated resources necessary 

to implement its requirements; and 

provides the necessary assurances that 

the State maintains responsibility for 

ensuring that the CAA requirements are 

satisfied in the event that local or 

regional agencies are unable to meet 

their CAA obligations. Most recently, on 

September 4, 2024, the EPA finalized a 

partial approval and partial disapproval 

of SIP revisions submitted by the State 

of Arizona with respect to the 

requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2) 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.46

Specifically, the EPA partially 

disapproved the SIP revisions for CAA 

requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C) 

(program for enforcement of control 

measures and regulation of new 

stationary sources), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

(interference with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in any other State, or ‘‘prong 

3’’), 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (interstate pollution 

abatement, CAA section 126), and 

110(a)(2)(J) (PSD and visibility 

protection). The deficiencies are 

adequately addressed by existing 

Federal implementation plans. 

In conclusion, we find that there are 

no outstanding or disapproved 

applicable SIP submittals that prevent 

redesignation of the Yuma area for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, we 

propose to conclude that the State has 

met all SIP requirements for the Yuma 

area that are applicable for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110 of the 

CAA. 

2. State Implementation Plan 

Requirements Under Part D 

Part D of the CAA establishes the plan 

requirements for nonattainment areas. 

Section 172(c) in subpart 1 of part D sets 

forth the basic requirements of air 

quality plans for States with 

nonattainment areas that are required to 

submit plans on a schedule pursuant to 

CAA section 172(b). Subpart 2 of part D, 

which includes section 182 of the CAA, 

establishes specific requirements for 

ozone nonattainment areas depending 

on the areas’ nonattainment 

classifications. The Yuma area is 

classified as Marginal nonattainment for 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS, and thus, the 

area is subject to the subpart 1 

requirements contained in CAA sections 

172(c) and 176, as well as CAA section 

182(c). A thorough discussion of the 

requirements contained in sections 

172(c) and 182(c) can be found in the 

‘‘General Preamble for Implementation 

of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990.’’ 47

CAA requirements for ozone 

nonattainment areas are cumulative in 

that ‘‘Extreme’’ areas must also meet the 

applicable requirements for the four 

lesser classifications: Marginal, 

‘‘Moderate,’’ ‘‘Serious,’’ and ‘‘Severe.’’ 

Because the Yuma area was classified as 

Marginal nonattainment for ozone, the 

area is only required to meet the 

applicable Marginal ozone 

requirements.48 Since its classification 

as a Marginal nonattainment area, the 

State has adopted and the EPA has 

approved into the Arizona SIP the 

following Marginal area requirements 

for the Yuma area with respect to the 

2015 ozone NAAQS: emissions 

inventories,49 emissions statements,50

and nonattainment new source review 

programs.51

In conclusion, we find that the Yuma 

area has a fully approved SIP under 

CAA section 110(k) that satisfies the 

criterion for redesignation under 

sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the 

CAA. 

C. The Area Must Show That the 

Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Emissions 

Reductions 

To approve a redesignation to 

attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of 

the CAA requires the EPA to determine 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to emissions reductions that are 

permanent and enforceable, and that the 

improvement results from the 

implementation of the applicable SIP, 

applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable regulations. Under this 

criterion, a State must be able to 

reasonably attribute the improvement in 

air quality to permanent and enforceable 

emissions reductions. Attainment 

resulting from temporary reductions in 

emissions (e.g., reduced production or 

shutdown due to temporary adverse 

economic conditions) or unusually 

favorable meteorology would not qualify 

as an air quality improvement due to 

permanent and enforceable emissions 

reductions.52

ADEQ found that the Yuma area has 

demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvements with respect to 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS are due to 

enforceable emissions reductions 

through the implementation of Federal 

vehicle standards, engine standards, and 

rules for boilers, reciprocating internal 

combustion engines, and electrical 

utility generation units. ADEQ found 

that, within the Yuma area, Federal 

regulations have been the primary 

measures contributing to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions, 

leading to attainment of the NAAQS.53

The Federal motor vehicle program 

and Federal fuel standards for sulfur 

content in diesel have contributed to 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in 

the Yuma area by reducing VOC and 

NOX.54 Federal tier 2 and 3 motor 

vehicle standards implemented from 

2004 to 2014 helped to reduce on-road 

mobile source VOC and NOX emissions 

in the Yuma area through increasingly 

stringent emissions standards. Federal 

sulfur content standards for diesel fuel 

were implemented in conjunction with 

the Federal motor vehicle program 

standards. Sulfur occurs naturally in 

gasoline and interferes with the 

operation of catalytic converters on 

vehicles, which results in higher NOX


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
87834 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

55 Id. 

56 Id. 

57 Yuma Maintenance Plan, Figure 2–2. 

58Calcagni memo, 8–9. 

59 ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

Regional Haze Regulations,’’ EPA–454/B–17–002, 

May 2017. 

60The maintenance plan horizon year refers to 

the final year of the maintenance period covered by 

the plan. 

emissions. Lower sulfur content fuel has 

reduced sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions 

and allowed pollution control 

equipment to operate more effectively to 

reduce emissions of other pollutants as 

well. 

Federal nonroad and stationary 

standards also contributed to attainment 

of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Nonroad 

spark-ignition and recreational engine 

standards implemented between 2003 

and 2020 have contributed to a 72 

percent reduction in VOCs and an 80 

percent reduction in NOX.55 The boiler 

and reciprocating internal combustion 

engines national emissions standards for 

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs), as 

well as the utility mercury and air toxics 

standards (MATS) and new source 

performance standards (NSPS) rules for 

electricity generating units also have 

contributed to VOC and NOX reductions 

in the Yuma area.56 Taken together, 

these Federal programs contributed to 

VOC and NOX emissions reductions in 

the Yuma area. 

With respect to the connection 

between the emissions reductions and 

the improvement in air quality, we also 

conclude that the air quality 

improvement in the Yuma area is due to 

permanent and enforceable emissions 

reductions and not the result of 

temporary or impermanent factors such 

as local economic downturn, temporary 

emissions reductions, or unusual or 

extreme weather patterns. Our 

conclusion is based on the observation 

that the ozone design value for the 

Yuma area has been below 0.070 ppm, 

the level of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

since 2020.57 In sum, ambient ozone 

concentrations in the Yuma area have 

been consistently below the NAAQS 

since 2020 and have not been subject to 

large swings and disparate observations 

that might result from a sudden facility 

closure or an extreme weather pattern. 

In conclusion, we find that the 

improvement in ambient air quality in 

the Yuma area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions of 

VOC and NOX, resulting from control 

measures such as (1) Federal vehicle 

standards and (2) stationary source 

control measures. Therefore, we propose 

to find that Arizona has satisfied the 

criterion for redesignation set forth at 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). 

D. The Area Must Have a Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plan Under 

CAA Section 175A 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA 

requires, as a pre-condition to being 

redesignated from nonattainment to 

attainment, that the Administrator has 

fully approved a maintenance plan for 

the area as meeting the requirements of 

section 175A of the Act. 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. The 

maintenance plan is a SIP revision that 

provides for maintenance of the relevant 

NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years 

after redesignation. The Calcagni memo, 

dated September 4, 1992, provides 

additional guidance on the required 

content of a maintenance plan. 

A maintenance plan should address 

the following five areas: the attainment 

emissions inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, monitoring network, 

verification of continued attainment, 

and a contingency plan. The attainment 

emissions inventory identifies the 

emissions level in the area that is 

sufficient to attain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS based on emissions during a 

three-year period which had no 

monitored violations. To demonstrate 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

ADEQ has projected the attainment 

emissions inventory through the first 

maintenance period and ensured that it 

was less than or equal to the inventory 

at the time of attainment. A 

maintenance plan must also include 

provisions for continued operation of an 

appropriate air quality monitoring 

network. The State must show how it 

will track and verify the progress of the 

maintenance plan. Finally, the 

maintenance plan must include a list of 

potential contingency measures which 

ensure prompt correction of any 

violation of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Based on our review and evaluation of 

the Yuma Maintenance Plan, as 

described in the following sections, we 

are proposing to approve the Plan as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A. 

1. Attainment Inventories and Projected 

Future Inventories 

A maintenance plan should include 

an ‘‘attainment emissions inventory’’ of 

ozone precursors in the area to identify 

a level of emissions sufficient to attain 

the NAAQS.58 The attainment 

emissions inventory should be 

consistent with the EPA’s most recent 

guidance on emissions inventories for 

nonattainment areas available at the 

time it was developed and should 

represent emissions during the 

timeframe associated with the ambient 

air quality monitoring data showing 

attainment of the NAAQS. The 

attainment inventory will generally be 

the actual inventory during the time 

period that the area attained the 

standard. The EPA has provided 

guidance for developing ozone 

emissions inventories in ‘‘Emissions 

Inventory Guidance for Implementation 

of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and Regional Haze 

Regulations’’.59

ADEQ selected 2020 as the base year 

for the attainment inventory in the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan. The Yuma 

area attained the 2015 ozone NAAQS in 

2020, and therefore, the emissions 

inventory from 2020 represents 

emissions levels consistent with 

continued attainment (i.e., maintenance) 

of the NAAQS. We consider the 

selection of the 2020 base year 

inventory to be appropriate given that it 

was the most recent emissions inventory 

associated with the reporting schedule 

required under the Air Emissions 

Reporting Requirements rule at the time 

of development of the Plan. 

Table 2 presents the VOC and NOX

emissions estimates contained in the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan for 2020 and 

presents the Plan’s projected emissions 

inventories of ozone precursors for an 

interim year (2030) and the maintenance 

plan’s horizon year (2037).60


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 87835 

61For the Yuma Maintenance Plan, ‘‘point 

sources’’ include rock crusher/screener plants, 

electricity generation facilities, paper mills, gas 

filling stations, and vapor extraction units. 

62For the Yuma Maintenance Plan, ‘‘nonpoint 

sources’’ include biogenic emissions, dry cleaning, 

surface coating, residential and industrial fuel 

combustion, and open burning. 

63For the Yuma Maintenance Plan, ‘‘Mobile— 

Nonroad sources’’ includes agricultural, 

commercial, lawn and garden, pleasure craft, 

railroad, and recreational nonroad mobile sources. 

64Calcagni memo, 9–11. 

65Calcagni memo, 9. 

66 Id. at 4. See also, memorandum dated 

November 30, 1993, from Kent D. Berry, Acting 

Director, Air Quality Management Division, EPA, 

Subject: ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance 

Demonstrations for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

(CO) Nonattainment Areas.’’ 

67For the year 2018, the APS Yucca Power Plant 

utilized 99.3 percent natural gas and 0.7 percent 

fuel oil. For a demonstration and justification for 

this estimation method, see the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan, appendix A, section A8.1, A–54. 

68 Yuma Maintenance Plan, appendix A, A–41, 

A–42. 

69 Yuma Maintenance Plan, appendix A, A–42– 

A–50. 

70Calcagni memo, 11. 

71 Yuma Maintenance Plan, 43. 

72Although the Yuma Maintenance Plan is not 

explicit in this regard, we presume that ADEQ’s 

intention to continue operation of a monitoring 

network indicates the agency’s intention to do so 

consistent with the EPA’s monitoring requirements 

in 40 CFR part 58 (‘‘Ambient Air Quality 

Surveillance’’). 

TABLE 2—YUMA AREA 2020 AND PROJECTED 2030 AND 2037 VOC AND NOX OZONE SEASON DAY EMISSIONS

[Pounds per day] a

Emissions source 

2020 2030 2037 

VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX

Point ......................................................... 104 1,662 1,384 4,628 1,384 4,628 

Nonpoint ................................................... 5,754 1,410 6,281 1,556 6,738 1,660 

Mobile—Nonroad ..................................... 1,792 1,620 1,720 923 1,754 782 

Mobile—On-road ...................................... 8,939 5,412 4,908 2,747 4,222 2,390 

Total b ................................................ 16,589 10,104 14,293 9,854 14,098 9,460 

aSource: Yuma Maintenance Plan, 43. 

bEmissions have been added to the Mobile—On-road emissions source category to account for safety margins added to proposed motor vehicle emissions budget. See the Yuma Maintenance Plan, page 50. 

The data shown in Table 3 in this 

document is based on the EPA’s 2020 

national emissions inventory (NEI). The 

inventory addresses point sources,61

nonpoint sources,62 nonroad mobile 

sources,63 and on-road mobile sources. 

Appendix A to the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan contains source-specific 

descriptions of emissions calculation 

procedures and sources of input data. 

The EPA has reviewed the emissions 

inventory submitted by ADEQ and 

proposes to conclude that the Plan’s 

inventory is based on reasonable 

assumptions and methodologies, and 

that the inventory is comprehensive, 

current, accurate, and consistent with 

applicable CAA provisions and the 

Calcagni memo. Therefore, we are 

proposing that the inventory is 

acceptable for use in demonstrating 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

Section 175A(a) of the CAA requires 

that the maintenance plan ‘‘provide for 

the maintenance of the national primary 

ambient air quality standard for such air 

pollutant in the area concerned for at 

least 10 years after the redesignation.’’ A 

State may generally demonstrate 

maintenance of the NAAQS by either 

showing that future emissions of a 

pollutant or its precursors will not 

exceed the level of the attainment 

inventory, or by conducting modeling 

that shows that the future mix of 

sources and emissions rates will not 

cause a violation of the NAAQS.64

Assumptions concerning emissions 

rates in maintenance demonstrations 

should generally reflect permanent, 

enforceable measures.65 Therefore, the 

analysis should assume that sources are 

operating at permitted levels (or historic 

peak levels), unless evidence is 

presented that such an assumption is 

unrealistic.66

The Yuma Maintenance Plan 

demonstrates maintenance of the 2015 

ozone NAAQS for a ten-year period 

beginning in 2027. ADEQ used the 2020 

NEI and the Motor Vehicle Emission 

Simulator (MOVES) version 3.1 as the 

baseline to develop growth factors for 

point, nonpoint, mobile on-road, and 

mobile nonroad sources. For point 

sources, ADEQ used permitted potential 

to emit (PTE) levels of emissions, except 

for the Arizona Public Service (APS) 

Yucca Power Plant. ADEQ argues that, 

for the APS Yucca Power Plant, 

permitted PTE is calculated by 

assuming the facility would burn fuel 

oil at maximum capacity, 

overestimating emissions from the 

facility. ADEQ argues that the facility 

runs primarily on natural gas and burns 

little fuel oil each year.67 Therefore, 

ADEQ used historic high emissions 

from 2018 for the baseline. We agree 

that this method for estimating 

emissions from APS Yucca Power Plant 

is consistent with EPA guidance. For 

nonpoint sources, ADEQ used the 2020 

NEI held constant, or multiplied by a 

projection factor based on population.68

ADEQ used MOVES 3.1 to model future 

on-road emissions, using Arizona 

Department of Transportation vehicle 

registration data and MOVES defaults.69

ADEQ used the EPA defaults for Yuma 

County and applied a population 

allocation factor to apportion the 

county-wide nonroad mobile source 

emissions to the Yuma nonattainment 

area. ADEQ also used MOVES to model 

future nonroad mobile source 

emissions. 

Table 2 compares the VOC and NOX

emissions estimated for the Yuma area 

for 2020 with those projected for 2030 

and 2037 by source category. The 

projected VOC and NOX emissions show 

that VOC and NOX emissions are 

projected to remain below the 

attainment levels throughout the 10-year 

period following redesignation. 

3. Monitoring Network 

Once an area has been redesignated, 

the State should continue to operate an 

appropriate air quality monitoring 

network in accordance with 40 CFR part 

58 to verify the attainment status of the 

area.70 Data collected by the monitoring 

network are also needed to determine if 

the contingency provisions of the 

maintenance plan are triggered. ADEQ 

currently operates one ozone monitor 

(the Yuma Supersite monitor) in the 

Yuma area. 

In the Yuma Maintenance Plan 71

ADEQ indicates its intention to 

continue operation of an air quality 

monitoring network to verify continued 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.72

We approved ADEQ’s State and Local 

Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) air 

quality network in their annual 

monitoring network plan for year 2023 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
87836 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

73The EPA’s requirements for annual review of 

monitoring networks are no longer codified at 40 

CFR 58.20(d) but are now found at 40 CFR 58.10. 

74Calcagni memo, 11. 75 Yuma Maintenance Plan, 45–47. 

76Control strategy SIPs refer to reasonable further 

progress (RFP) and attainment demonstration SIPs. 

40 CFR 93.101. 

77 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). For more 

information on the transportation conformity 

requirement and applicable policies on budgets, 

on October 30, 2023, prior to ADEQ’s 

submittal of the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan.73 We find ADEQ’s commitment for 

continued ambient ozone monitoring set 

forth in the Yuma Maintenance Plan to 

be acceptable for the purpose of 

verifying continued maintenance in the 

Yuma area. 

4. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Each State should ensure that it has 

the legal authority to implement and 

enforce all measures necessary to 

maintain the NAAQS.74

ADEQ has the legal authority to 

implement and enforce the 

requirements of the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan under title 49 of the Arizona 

Revised Statutes, ‘‘The Environment.’’ 

This includes the authority to adopt, 

implement, and enforce any emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

2015 ozone NAAQS violations. To 

verify continued attainment, ADEQ 

committed to the continued operation of 

an ozone monitoring network that meets 

the EPA air quality surveillance 

requirements. In addition, ADEQ 

committed to track the progress of the 

maintenance plan through continued 

development and submission of 

periodic emissions inventories to the 

EPA and review of the inventory to 

determine whether changes could affect 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

These methods are sufficient for the 

purpose of verifying continued 

attainment. 

5. Contingency Provisions 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that maintenance plans contain 

contingency provisions, as the EPA 

deems necessary, to promptly correct 

any violations of the NAAQS that occur 

after redesignation of the area. Such 

provisions must include a requirement 

that the State will implement all 

measures with respect to the control of 

the air pollutant concerned that were 

contained in the SIP prior to the area 

being redesignated to attainment. These 

contingency provisions are 

distinguished from contingency 

measures required for nonattainment 

areas under CAA section 172(c)(9) in 

that they are not required to be fully 

adopted measures that will take effect 

without further action by the State for 

the maintenance plan to be approved. 

The contingency provisions of a 

maintenance plan are, however, an 

enforceable part of the SIP and should 

ensure that contingency measures are 

adopted expeditiously once the Plan’s 

contingency provisions are triggered by 

a specified event. Thus, a State should 

identify the specific indicators or 

triggers that will be used to determine 

when the contingency measures need to 

be implemented. Next, the maintenance 

plan should clearly identify the 

measures to be adopted, include a 

schedule and procedure for adoption 

and implementation of the measures, 

and contain a specific timeline for 

action by a State. 

As required by section 175A of the 

CAA, ADEQ has adopted a contingency 

plan to address possible future ozone air 

quality problems.75 ADEQ identifies 

two triggers: a warning level response 

and action level response. The warning 

level response would be triggered if an 

annual 4th high monitored 

concentration is above the level of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. This would initiate 

an analysis to determine whether the 

high ozone concentrations indicate a 

trend towards high ozone levels. The 

study would include an assessment of 

meteorological conditions and an 

assessment of whether actual emissions 

have deviated significantly from the 

emissions projections contained in the 

maintenance plan, along with an 

evaluation of which source sectors are 

responsible for emissions increases. The 

action level response would be triggered 

if a certified design value exceeds the 

level of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Within 

18 months of the certified design value 

exceedance, ADEQ commits to identify 

and implement necessary control 

measures. 

Potential contingency measures listed 

in the maintenance plan are those 

emissions controls or other measures 

that ADEQ may choose to adopt and 

implement in response to the 

contingency trigger. The contingency 

plan lists the following potential 

contingency provisions that will be 

considered for adoption and 

implementation by the applicable State 

agency, while the Plan indicates that the 

list is not considered to be exhaustive: 

• Anti-idling control program for 

mobile sources, targeting diesel 

vehicles; 

• Diesel exhaust retrofits; 

• Traffic flow improvements; 

• Park and ride facilities; and 

• Rideshare/carpool program. 

Upon our review of the Plan, we find 

that the contingency provisions in the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan clearly identify 

specific contingency measures, contain 

sufficient tracking and triggering 

mechanisms to determine when 

contingency provisions are needed, 

contain an adequate description of the 

process of recommending and 

implementing contingency measures, 

and contain specific timelines for 

action. Thus, we conclude that the 

contingency provisions of the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan are adequate to 

ensure prompt correction of a violation 

and therefore comply with section 

175A(d) of the Act. 

6. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

Federal actions in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to conform to the 

SIP’s goals of eliminating or reducing 

the severity and number of violations of 

the NAAQS and achieving expeditious 

attainment of the standards. Conformity 

to the SIP’s goals means that such 

actions will not: (1) cause or contribute 

to violations of the NAAQS, (2) worsen 

the severity of an existing violation, (3) 

or delay timely attainment of any 

NAAQS or any interim milestone. 

Actions involving Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding 

or approval are subject to the EPA’s 

transportation conformity rule, codified 

in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Under this 

rule, regional transit authorities in 

nonattainment and maintenance areas 

coordinate with State and local air 

quality and transportation agencies, the 

EPA, FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate 

that an area’s regional transportation 

plans and transportation improvement 

programs conform to the applicable SIP. 

This demonstration is typically done by 

showing that estimated emissions from 

existing and planned highway and 

transit systems are less than or equal to 

the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(‘‘budgets’’) contained in submitted or 

approved control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans.76

These control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans typically set budgets 

for criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Budgets are generally 

established for specific years and 

specific pollutants or precursors. 

Maintenance plan submittals should 

identify budgets for transportation 

related VOC and NOX emissions in the 

last year of the maintenance period. 

For budgets in a maintenance plan to 

be approvable, they must meet, at a 

minimum, the EPA’s adequacy 

criteria.77 To meet these requirements, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 87837 

which can be found at https://www.ecfr.gov/ 

current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-93. 

78See the EPA adequacy website: https://

www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/stateimplementation-plans-sip-submissions-currentlyunder-epa. 

79See the EPA memorandum dated July 15, 2024, 

titled: ‘‘Adequacy Documentation for Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets in the Yuma Maintenance Plan.’’ 

80See the EPA memorandum dated July 15, 2024, 

titled: ‘‘Adequacy Documentation for Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets in the Yuma Maintenance Plan.’’ 

81 Yuma Maintenance Plan (submitted 

electronically December 27, 2023). 

the budgets must be consistent, when 

considered with emissions from all 

other sources, with maintenance of the 

NAAQS and reflect all the motor vehicle 

control measures relied upon for the 

maintenance demonstration. The EPA’s 

process for determining adequacy of a 

budget consists of three basic steps: (1) 

providing public notification of a SIP 

submission; (2) providing the public the 

opportunity to comment on the budgets 

during a public comment period; and (3) 

making a finding of adequacy. The 

process for determining the adequacy of 

a submitted budget is codified at 40 CFR 

93.118(f). The EPA can notify the public 

by either posting an announcement that 

the EPA has received SIP budgets on the 

EPA’s adequacy website,78 or via a 

Federal Register notice of proposed 

rulemaking when the EPA reviews the 

adequacy of a maintenance plan budget 

simultaneously with its review and 

action on the SIP submittal itself.79

The Yuma Maintenance Plan contains 

VOC and NOX budgets for 2020, 2030, 

and 2037. Any and all comments on the 

approvability of the budgets should be 

submitted during the comment period 

stated in the Dates section of this 

document. 

The EPA proposes to approve the 

2020, 2030, and 2037 budgets in the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan for 

transportation conformity purposes. If 

the EPA issues a final action to approve 

the budgets, these budgets must be used 

in future transportation conformity 

determinations for the Yuma area for the 

2015 ozone standard. 

The new budgets, if approved in the 

final rulemaking, will be effective on the 

date of publication of the EPA’s final 

rulemaking in the Federal Register. The 

applicable VOC and NOX budgets for 

the Yuma nonattainment area are 

defined in Table 3. 

TABLE 3—PROPOSED MOTOR VEHICLE

EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE YUMA

AREA

[Pounds per ozone season day] 

Budget year VOC NOX

2020 .................................. 8,939 5,412 

2030 .................................. 4,908 2,747 

2037 .................................. 4,222 2,390 

Source: Yuma Maintenance Plan, Table 7– 

1. 

The budgets are the on-road mobile 

source VOC and NOX emissions for the 

Yuma area for 2020, 2030, and 2037. 

The budgets are compatible with the 

2020, 2030, and 2037 on-road mobile 

source VOC and NOX emissions 

included in Yuma’s 2020, 2030 and 

2037 emissions inventories, as 

summarized in Table 2. The derivation 

of the budget is thoroughly discussed in 

appendix A to the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan. 

We evaluated the budgets against our 

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

and (5) as part of our review of the 

budget’s approvability and expect to 

complete the adequacy review of the 

budgets concurrent with our final action 

on the Yuma Maintenance Plan. The 

EPA is not required under its 

transportation conformity rule to find 

budgets adequate prior to proposing 

approval of them. In this notice, the 

EPA is announcing that the adequacy 

process for these budgets begins, and 

the public has 30 days to comment on 

their adequacy, per the transportation 

conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(i) 

and (ii). 

ADEQ developed budgets for 2020, 

2030 and 2037 using on-road motor 

vehicle emission estimates using the 

EPA’s MOVES3 model fleet data from 

Arizona Motor Vehicle Division 

registration data, and travel demand 

modeling from the Yuma Metropolitan 

Planning Organization (YMPO). As 

documented in a separate 

memorandum 80 included in the docket 

for this rulemaking, we preliminarily 

conclude that the budgets in the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan meet each adequacy 

criterion. While adequacy and approval 

are two separate actions, reviewing the 

budgets in terms of the adequacy criteria 

informs the EPA’s decision to propose 

to approve the budgets. We have 

completed our detailed review and are 

proposing to approve the demonstration 

of maintenance for the 2015 ozone area 

through the year 2037. We have also 

reviewed the budgets in the Yuma 

Maintenance Plan and found that they 

are consistent with the maintenance 

demonstration for which we are 

proposing approval, are clearly 

identified and precisely quantified, are 

based on control measures that have 

already been adopted and implemented 

and meet all other applicable statutory 

and regulatory requirements including 

the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) and (5). The EPA is 

proposing to approve the budgets for 

2020, 2030, and 2037 as part of our 

approval of the Yuma Maintenance 

Plan. Once the EPA finalizes the 

adequacy process or approves the 

budgets as proposed (whichever occurs 

first, noting that finalization of the 

adequacy process and approval of the 

budgets may also occur concurrently per 

40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii)), the budgets 

must be used by YMPO for 

transportation conformity 

determinations for the Yuma area. 

IV. Proposed Action and Request for 

Public Comment 

Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for 

the reasons set forth in this document, 

the EPA is proposing to approve the 

Yuma Maintenance Plan submitted by 

ADEQ on December 27, 2023, as a 

revision to the Arizona SIP,81 and to 

redesignate the Yuma nonattainment 

area to attainment for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. We are proposing to approve 

the maintenance demonstration and 

contingency provisions as meeting all 

applicable requirements for 

maintenance plans and related 

contingency provisions in CAA section 

175A, and the budgets for 2020, 2030 

and 2037 (shown in Table 4) for 

transportation conformity purposes as 

we find they meet all applicable criteria 

for such budgets including the adequacy 

criteria under 40 CFR 93.118(e). We are 

soliciting comments on these proposed 

actions. We will accept comments from 

the public for 30 days following 

publication of this proposal in the 

Federal Register and will consider any 

relevant comments before taking final 

action. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by State law. A redesignation 

to attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 review State choices, 

and approve those choices if they meet 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

I I 
87838 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

82Letter dated June 4, 2024, from Matthew Lakin, 

Director, EPA Region IX to Sherry Cordova, 

Chairwoman, Cocopah Tribe of Arizona, Subject: 

‘‘Invitation to Consult on a Redesignation Request 

and Maintenance Plan from the State of Arizona for 

the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS),’’ and letter dated June 4, 2024 

from Matt Lakin, Director, EPA Region IX to Jordan 

Joaquin, President, Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma 

Indian Reservation, Subject: ‘‘Invitation to Consult 

on a Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan 

from the State of Arizona for the 2015 Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS).’’ 

the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 

this action merely approves State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Will not have disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority 

populations, low-income populations 

and/or indigenous peoples, as specified 

in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994), as discussed in 

section VI of this proposal. 

The EPA has identified Tribal areas 

within the Yuma area covered by this 

rulemaking that would be potentially 

affected by this proposed action. 

Specifically, the Cocopah Tribe of 

Arizona and the Quechan Tribe of the 

Fort Yuma Indian Reservation are 

located within the boundaries of the 

Yuma area. 

The EPA has concluded that the final 

rule may have Tribal implications for 

these tribes for the purposes of 

transportation conformity only, as this 

document sets motor vehicle emissions 

budgets for ozone precursors for the 

Yuma area, which includes some Tribal 

roads. The EPA has communicated with 

the potentially affected tribes located 

within the boundaries of the Yuma 

nonattainment area.82

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies 

to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns to 

the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines EJ as 

‘‘the fair treatment and meaningful 

involvement of all people regardless of 

race, color, national origin, or income 

with respect to the development, 

implementation, and enforcement of 

environmental laws, regulations, and 

policies.’’ EPA further defines the term 

fair treatment to mean that ‘‘no group of 

people should bear a disproportionate 

burden of environmental harms and 

risks, including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The air agency did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ 

analysis and did not consider EJ in this 

action. Due to the nature of the action 

being taken here, this action is expected 

to have a neutral to positive impact on 

the air quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of 

achieving environmental justice for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

Dioxide, Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental Protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: October 29, 2024. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25575 Filed 11–4–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 665 

[Docket No. 240220–0053240] 

RIN 0648–BM01 

Pacific Island Fisheries; Withdrawal of 

Proposed Rule; Catch and Retention 

Limits for Striped Marlin in the Western 

and Central Pacific Ocean North of the 

Equator 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: NMFS withdraws the 

proposed rule for ‘‘Catch and Retention 

Limits for Striped Marlin in the Western 

and Central North Pacific Ocean North 

of the Equator’’ that published in the 

Federal Register on February 26, 2024. 

This proposed rule was intended to 

satisfy Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) obligations to 

address U.S. fishing vessels’ relative 

impact on this internationally managed 

stock that, based on a prior stock 

assessment and domestic status 

determination criteria, NMFS 

determined was overfished. NMFS is 

now withdrawing the proposed rule 

because NMFS has determined the stock 

is no longer overfished, not approaching 

an overfished condition, and is 

rebuilding, based on a more recent 

assessment. Thus, the factual and legal 

bases for the proposed rule no longer 

apply. 

DATES: The proposed rule published 

February 26, 2024 (89 FR 14036) is 

withdrawn as of November 5, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Fishery 

Ecosystem Plan for Pelagic Fisheries of 

the Western Pacific (Pelagic FEP) are 

available from the Western Pacific 

Fishery Management Council (Council), 

1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, 

HI 96813, tel. 808–522–8220, fax 808– 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1