[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 66 (Tuesday, April 7, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18528-18535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07765]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0813; FRL-9925-30-Region 9]


Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; 
California; San Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as Serious 
Nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to reclassify the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Moderate 
nonattainment area, including areas of Indian country within it, as a 
Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) based on EPA's determination that 
the area cannot practicably attain these NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of April 5, 2015 and in response to a request from the 
SJV Air Pollution Control District that we reclassify the area. As a 
consequence of this reclassification, California must submit a Serious 
area plan including a demonstration that the plan provides for 
attainment of the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards in 
the SJV area by the applicable attainment date, which is no later than 
December 31, 2015, or by the most expeditious alternative date 
practicable, in accordance with the requirements of part D of title I 
of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 7, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The index to the docket (docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2014-
0813) for this action is available electronically on the 
www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California, 94105. While all documents 
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly 
available for viewing only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material, voluminous records, large maps), and some may not be publicly 
available at either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the docket 
materials in person, please schedule an appointment during normal 
business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (415) 972-3958, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#472b22226926292e33260722372669202831"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e08c8585ce818e899481a0859081ce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
    A. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable 
Attainment Dates
    B. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country
    C. PM<INF>2.5</INF> Serious Area SIP Requirements
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On January 12, 2015 (80 FR 1482), EPA proposed to reclassify the 
SJV nonattainment area, including areas of Indian country within it, 
from Moderate nonattainment to Serious nonattainment for the 1997 
annual and 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards based on EPA's 
determination that the area cannot practicably attain these NAAQS by 
the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2015.\1\ Under section 
188(b)(1) of the CAA, prior to an area's attainment date, EPA has 
discretionary authority to reclassify as a Serious nonattainment area 
``any area that the Administrator determines cannot practicably 
attain'' the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable Moderate area 
attainment date.\2\ On September 25, 2014, the District requested that 
EPA reclassify the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for 
the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards. This request included a 
demonstration that the SJV area cannot practicably attain the 1997 
annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> standard by the April 5,

[[Page 18529]]

2015 attainment date.\3\ EPA's proposed reclassification of the SJV 
area was based upon our evaluation of ambient air quality data for the 
2003-2014 period indicating that it is not practicable for certain 
monitoring sites within the SJV area to show PM<INF>2.5</INF> design 
values at or below the level of the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by 
April 5, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See proposed rule at 80 FR 1482 (January 12, 2015) for a 
more detailed discussion of the background for this action, 
including the history of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS established in 
1997, health effects and sources of PM<INF>2.5,</INF> designation of 
the SJV as nonattainment for the PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards, and 
EPA's actions on the submittals from the state of California to 
address the nonattainment area planning requirements for the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the SJV.
    \2\ Section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of 
delegated rulemaking authority. See ``State Implementation Plans; 
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (hereafter 
``General Preamble'') at 13537, n. 15. Although subparagraphs (A) 
and (B) of section 188(b)(1) mandate that EPA reclassify by 
specified timeframes any areas that it determines appropriate for 
reclassification by those dates, these subparagraphs do not restrict 
the general authority but simply specify that, at a minimum, EPA's 
authority must be exercised at certain times. See id.
    \3\ See letter titled ``Sadredin Memo'' in the docket for this 
rulemaking at EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0813-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our proposed rule, EPA identified the additional SIP revisions 
that California would, upon reclassification, have to submit to satisfy 
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, including the 
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.\4\ EPA 
explained that under section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the State must 
submit the required provisions to implement best available control 
measures (BACM), including best available control technology (BACT), no 
later than 18 months after reclassification and must submit the 
required attainment demonstration no later than 4 years after 
reclassification. Given the December 31, 2015, Serious area attainment 
date applicable to this area under CAA section 188(c)(2), however, we 
noted that we expect the State to adopt and submit a Serious area plan 
for these NAAQS well before the statutory SIP submittal deadlines in 
CAA section 189(b)(2).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 80 FR 1482 at 1488 (January 12, 2015).
    \5\ Id. at 1489.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program 
revisions to establish appropriate ``major stationary source'' 
thresholds for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors 
in accordance with CAA section 189(b)(3), EPA proposed to require the 
State to submit these NNSR SIP revisions no later than 12 months after 
the effective date of final reclassification. EPA requested comment on 
this proposed 12-month timeframe but also noted that if California 
intended to seek an extension of the Serious area attainment date, the 
State would need to submit a request that satisfies the requirements of 
CAA section 188(e), including the required NNSR SIP revisions, in time 
for EPA to approve such an extension prior to the December 31, 2015 
Serious area attainment date.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA received one comment letter on our proposed action. The comment 
letter was submitted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control 
District (``SJVAPCD'' or ``District'') on February 11, 2015, prior to 
the close of the comment period on our proposal.\6\ We summarize the 
District's comments and provide our responses below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See letter dated February 11, 2015, from Seyed Sadredin, 
Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer of the SJVAPCD, to 
Anita Lee, EPA Region 9, ``Re: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0813: 
Comments on Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; 
California; San Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as Serious 
Nonattainment for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Standards. Proposed Rule 
(80 FR 7, pp. 1482-1491, January 12, 2015).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: The SJVAPCD expresses support for EPA's proposed 12-month 
timeframe for California's submission of the required NNSR SIP 
revisions but objects to EPA's statement indicating that, to obtain an 
extension of the attainment date under CAA section 188(e), the state 
must submit these NNSR revisions ``in time for EPA to approve such an 
extension prior to the December 31, 2015 Serious area attainment 
date.'' The District asserts that EPA ``provides no valid justification 
for this requirement'' and that section 188(e) of the Act contains ``no 
mention of NSR, either directly or by implication, that would lead one 
to believe that the updated NSR rule is required prior to approval of 
the attainment deadline extension.'' The District contends that delays 
in EPA's regulatory actions related to implementation of the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards justify a different schedule for this 
submission.
    In sum, the District asserts that EPA is asking the District to 
begin an expedited process to adopt a serious area NSR rule before the 
area is reclassified as a Serious area and without implementation rules 
or guidance. The SJVAPCD requests that EPA decide in the final rule to 
require the District to submit a revised NNSR rule within 12 months 
after EPA's final reclassification action and also to decide that 
``such an NSR rule adoption deadline does not interfere with EPA's 
ability to approve an attainment deadline extension under 188(e).''
    Response: As a preliminary matter, EPA notes that nothing in the 
CAA requires the Agency to promulgate any implementation rules or 
guidance with respect to implementation of the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. The statutory provisions of the 1990 CAA Amendments addressing 
implementation of the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS and EPA guidance for 
implementation of the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS dating back to 1992 and 
1994 are still applicable and relevant to this action.\7\ Thus, the 
absence of revised implementation rules or additional guidance is not 
itself a basis for setting a particular schedule for a state to make a 
statutorily required SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See generally subpart 4 of part D, title I of the CAA 
(``Additional Provisions for Particulate Matter Nonattainment 
Areas''); the General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); and 
the Addendum, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994); see also Natural 
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 
2013) (ruling that the CAA requires implementation of the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards under subpart 4 because PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
particles fall within the statutory definition of PM<INF>10</INF>).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon further consideration of this question, however, EPA has 
determined that the specific factual circumstances in this instance 
justify the 12 months sought by SJVAPCD for the submission of the NNSR 
revisions. Accordingly, we are finalizing our proposal to require that 
California adopt and submit NNSR SIP revisions to implement the subpart 
4 requirements for Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas in the 
SJV area no later than 12 months after the effective date of this 
reclassification. In light of the unique circumstances in the SJV, as 
discussed below, we do not intend at this time to treat these NNSR SIP 
revisions as a precondition to a request for an extension of the 
Serious area attainment date under CAA section 188(e).
    Under section 188(e) of the Act, a state may apply to EPA for a 
single extension of the Serious area attainment date by up to 5 years, 
which EPA may grant if the State satisfies certain conditions. Before 
EPA may extend the attainment date for a Serious area under section 
188(e), the state must: (1) Apply for an extension of the attainment 
date beyond the statutory attainment date; (2) demonstrate that 
attainment by the statutory attainment date is impracticable; (3) have 
complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area 
in the implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the 
Administrator that the plan for the area includes the most stringent 
measures that are included in the implementation plan of any State or 
are achieved in practice in any State, and can feasibly be implemented 
in the area; and (5) submit a demonstration of attainment by the most 
expeditious alternative date practicable.\8\ Section

[[Page 18530]]

188(e) does not explicitly require the state to have a fully approved 
NNSR program that meets the Act's Serious area requirements before it 
may qualify for an extension of the Serious area attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For a discussion of EPA's interpretation of the requirements 
of section 188(e), see ``State Implementation Plans for Serious 
PM<INF>10</INF> Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for 
PM<INF>10</INF> Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the 
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994) (hereafter 
``Addendum'') at 42002; 65 FR 19964 (April 13, 2000) (proposed 
action on PM<INF>10</INF> Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 66 FR 
50252 (October 2, 2001) (proposed action on PM<INF>10</INF> Plan for 
Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 (July 25, 2002) (final action 
on PM<INF>10</INF> Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); and Vigil v. 
EPA, 366 F.3d 1025, amended at 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) 
(remanding EPA action on PM<INF>10</INF> Plan for Maricopa County, 
Arizona, but generally upholding EPA's interpretation of CAA section 
188(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of today's reclassification of the SJV as Serious 
nonattainment for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, California is 
required to submit NNSR SIP revisions consistent with the requirements 
of subpart 4, including revisions to establish appropriate ``major 
stationary source'' thresholds for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in accordance with CAA section 189(b)(3). 
Given the timing of this reclassification, just months before the 
latest permissible Serious area attainment date (December 31, 2015), 
and the unusually short timeframe for the State's development and 
submission of a plan to provide for attainment of the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by this date,\9\ we find it reasonable to 
provide the State a small amount of additional time to adopt and submit 
the Serious area NNSR SIP revisions required under subpart 4. 
Accordingly, under these particular circumstances, we do not expect the 
State to submit the required NNSR SIP revisions simultaneously with the 
Serious area attainment plan or with a request for an extension of the 
Serious area attainment date under CAA section 188(e). Instead, this 
final action requires the state to submit the NNSR SIP revisions 
required under subpart 4 no later than 12 months after the effective 
date of the reclassification.\10\ The State will need to submit the 
Serious area attainment plan and the section 188(e) extension request 
before December 31, 2015 to satisfy the statutory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As explained in our proposed rule (see 80 FR 1482 at 1483-
1484), on January 4, 2013 the D.C. Circuit remanded EPA's 2007 and 
2008 rules to implement the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and directed EPA 
to repromulgate these rules pursuant to subpart 4 of part D, title I 
of the Act. On June 2, 2014, EPA promulgated a rule classifying all 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas as Moderate under subpart 4 and 
establishing a deadline for states to submit SIPs necessary to 
satisfy the Moderate area requirements (see 79 FR 31566, June 2, 
2014). By this time, just over 18 months remained before the Serious 
area attainment date applicable to the SJV area under CAA section 
188(c)(2), which is December 31, 2015. See 80 FR 1482 at 1484, 1487 
(January 12, 2015).
    \10\ As explained in our proposed rule, a 12-month timeframe 
provides the State a reasonable amount of time to make these 
relatively straightforward NNSR SIP revisions while assuring that 
new or modified major stationary sources of PM<INF>2.5</INF> in the 
SJV area will be subject to the applicable NNSR requirements as 
expeditiously as practicable. See 80 FR 1482 at 1489.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has recently issued a new proposed rulemaking to implement the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in accordance with the requirements of subparts 
1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act.\11\ As part of this proposed 
rulemaking, the Agency is seeking comment on how to interpret the 
criteria in section 188(e) for granting state requests for an extension 
of a Serious area attainment date prospectively. Until the Agency 
finalizes that proposed rule, EPA encourages the State and District to 
review the statutory provisions of the CAA applicable to implementation 
of the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS, and EPA's prior guidance in the General 
Preamble and Addendum, as they develop the SIP revisions necessary to 
satisfy the Serious area requirements that now apply in the SJV 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area.\12\ Until EPA finalizes any new 
implementation rule for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, the existing 
guidance in the General Preamble and Addendum provide the Agency's 
recommendations for SIP submissions required for the PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See http://www.epa.gov/airquality/particlepollution/actions.html.
    \12\ See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 
1992) and Addendum, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

A. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable Attainment 
Date

    In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, EPA is taking 
final action to reclassify the SJV area from Moderate to Serious 
nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
standards of 15.0 and 65 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively, based on EPA's 
determination that the SJV area cannot practicably attain these 
standards by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2015.
    Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a 
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's 
designation as nonattainment. . . .'' The SJV area was designated 
nonattainment for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards effective April 
5, 2005.\13\ Therefore, as a result of our reclassification of the SJV 
area as a Serious nonattainment area, the latest permissible attainment 
date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for purposes of the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards in this area, is December 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 70 FR 944 at 956, 957 (January 5, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Reclassification of Areas of Indian Country 14
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to: 
``(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the 
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the 
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through 
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the 
borders of the United States whether within the original or 
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or 
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the 
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Eight Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the San 
Joaquin Valley PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area: The Big Sandy 
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of 
Mono Indians of California, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of 
California, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California, 
the Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain 
Rancheria of California, the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River 
Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
    We have considered the relevance of our final action to reclassify 
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
standards to each tribe located within the SJV area. As discussed in 
more detail in our proposed rule, we believe that the same facts and 
circumstances that support the reclassification for the non-Indian 
country lands also support reclassification for Indian country located 
within the SJV nonattainment area.\15\ In this final action, EPA is 
therefore exercising our authority under CAA section 188(b)(1) to 
reclassify areas of Indian country geographically located in the SJV 
nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly authorizes EPA to 
reclassify a nonattainment area--including any area of Indian country 
located within such area--that EPA determines cannot practicably attain 
the relevant standard by the applicable attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 80 FR 1482 at 1488 (January 12, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The effect of reclassification would be to lower the applicable 
``major stationary source'' emissions thresholds for direct 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors for purposes of the 
NNSR program and the Title V operating permit program (CAA sections 
189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B)) thus subjecting more new or modified 
stationary sources to these requirements. The reclassification may also 
lower the de minimis threshold under the CAA's General Conformity 
requirements (40 CFR part 93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under 
the General Conformity requirements, Federal agencies bear the 
responsibility

[[Page 18531]]

of determining conformity of actions in nonattainment and maintenance 
areas that require Federal permits, approvals, or funding. Such 
permits, approvals or funding by Federal agencies for projects in these 
areas of Indian country may be more difficult to obtain because of the 
lower de minimis thresholds.
    Given the potential implications of the reclassification, EPA 
contacted tribal officials to invite government-to-government 
consultation on this rulemaking effort.\16\ EPA did not receive 
comments on our proposed rule from any tribe. On February 17, 2015, 
after the close of the comment period on our proposal, EPA received a 
letter dated January 30, 2015, from the Tejon Tribe expressing interest 
in developing a better understanding of the reclassification and 
implications for air quality.\17\ EPA invited the Tejon Tribe to 
participate in a conference call during the week of February 23, 2015, 
to discuss the Tribe's questions.\18\ We continue to invite Indian 
tribes in the SJV to contact EPA with any questions about the effects 
of this reclassification on tribal interests and air quality. We note 
that although eligible tribes may opt to seek EPA approval of relevant 
tribal programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes will be 
required to submit an implementation plan to address this 
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, EPA sent 
letters to tribal officials inviting government-to-government 
consultation. All eight letters can be found in the docket for this 
proposed action.
    \17\ See letter dated January 30, 2015 from Kathryn Montes 
Morgan, Tribal Chairwoman, Tejon Indian Tribe to Kerry Drake, 
Associate Director, EPA Region 9 Air Division.
    \18\ See email dated February 19, 2015 from Maeve Clancy, EPA 
Region 9 Air Division, to Kathryn Montes Morgan, Tribal Chairwoman, 
Tejon Indian Tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements

    As a consequence of our reclassification of the SJV area as a 
Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, 
California is required to submit additional SIP revisions to satisfy 
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, including the 
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
    The Serious area SIP elements that California must submit are as 
follows:
    1. Provisions to assure that the best available control measures 
(BACM), including best available control technology (BACT) for 
stationary sources, for the control of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years 
after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
    2. A demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan 
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than December 31, 2015, or where the State is seeking an extension of 
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that 
attainment by December 31, 2015 is impracticable and that the plan 
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date 
practicable (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
    3. Plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP) 
(CAA section 172(c)(2));
    4. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years 
until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate RFP 
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
    5. Provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to 
major stationary sources of PM<INF>2.5</INF> also apply to major 
stationary sources of PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, except where the 
State demonstrates to EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not 
contribute significantly to PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels that exceed the 
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
    6. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions 
from all sources of PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in 
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    7. Contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet 
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section 
172(c)(9)); and
    8. A revision to the NNSR program to establish appropriate ``major 
stationary source'' \19\ thresholds for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For any Serious area, the terms ``major source'' and 
``major stationary source'' include any stationary source that emits 
or has the potential to emit at least 70 tons per year of 
PM<INF>10</INF> (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 189(b)(2) states, in relevant part, that the State must 
submit the required BACM provisions ``no later than 18 months after 
reclassification of the area as a Serious Area'' and must submit the 
required attainment demonstration ``no later than 4 years after 
reclassification of the area to Serious.'' Thus, the Act provides the 
State with up to 18 months after the effective date of this 
reclassification (i.e., until late 2016) to submit a BACM demonstration 
and up to 4 years after this date (i.e., until early 2019) to submit a 
Serious area attainment demonstration. Given the December 31, 2015 
Serious area attainment date for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards in 
this area under CAA section 188(c)(2), however, EPA expects the State 
to adopt and submit a Serious area plan for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
standards well before the statutory SIP submittal deadlines in section 
189(b)(2).
    Additionally, in light of the available ambient air quality data 
and the short amount of time available before the December 31, 2015 
attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2), EPA anticipates that 
California may choose to submit a request for an extension of the 
Serious area attainment date pursuant to section 188(e) simultaneously 
with its submittal of a Serious area plan for the area. If California 
fails to submit a request for an extension of the Serious area 
attainment date that satisfies the requirements of section 188(e) and 
the SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards by 
December 31, 2015, under CAA section 189(d) the State would be required 
to submit, within 12 months after December 31, 2015, plan revisions 
which provide for attainment of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards and, 
from the date of such submission until attainment, for an annual 
reduction in emissions within the SJV area of not less than 5 percent 
of the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent 
inventory prepared for the area (hereafter ``section 189(d) plan''). 
If, however, California submits and EPA approves a section 188(e) 
request for an extension of the Serious area attainment date prior to 
the December 31, 2015 attainment date for the SJV area, the requirement 
to submit a section 189(d) plan would not apply unless and until the 
SJV area fails to attain the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards by the 
extended attainment date approved by EPA under section 188(e).
    Given the short amount of time available for California's 
development of these SIP submittals, EPA anticipates that the Serious 
area attainment demonstration for the SJV area may rely to some extent 
on existing photochemical modeling analyses developed for previous 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan submittals. EPA commits to work with the District 
and the State as they develop the necessary technical support for the 
Serious area plan and to provide guidance on the requirements that 
California must meet to qualify for an extension of the Serious area 
attainment date under CAA section 188(e).
    Finally, for the reasons provided in our proposed rule \20\ and in 
our responses to comments above, we are finalizing our proposal to 
require the State to submit the NNSR SIP revisions required for Serious 
areas under subpart

[[Page 18532]]

4 no later than 12 months after the effective date of this 
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 80 FR 1482 at 1489.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is exempt from review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) because it relates to a designation of an area for air 
quality purposes and will reclassify the SJV from its current air 
quality designation of Moderate nonattainment to Serious nonattainment 
for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA. This action does not contain any information collection 
activities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. The final 
rule requires the state to adopt and submit SIP revisions to satisfy 
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, and would not 
itself directly regulate any small entities (see section III.C of this 
final rule).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million 
or more and does not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538). This action 
itself imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal 
governments, or the private sector. The final action reclassifies the 
SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, which triggers existing statutory timeframes 
for the state to submit SIP revisions. Such a reclassification in and 
of itself does not impose any federal intergovernmental mandate. The 
final action does not require any tribes to submit implementation 
plans.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action may have tribal implications. However, it will neither 
impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized 
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Eight Indian tribes are 
located within the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment area for the 
1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS: The Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of 
California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, 
the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Picayune 
Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California, the Santa Rosa Rancheria 
of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain Rancheria of California, 
the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian Tribe of the Tule 
River Reservation. We note that none of the tribes located in the SJV 
nonattainment area have requested eligibility to administer programs 
under the Clean Air Act. This final action affects EPA's implementation 
of the new source review program because of the lower ``major 
stationary source'' threshold triggered by reclassification (CAA 
189(b)(3)). The final action may also affect new or modified stationary 
sources proposed in these areas that require Federal permits, 
approvals, or funding. Such projects are subject to the requirements of 
EPA's General Conformity rule, and Federal permits, approvals, or 
funding for the projects may be more difficult to obtain because of the 
lower de minimis thresholds triggered by reclassification.
    Given these potential implications, consistent with the EPA Policy 
on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes, EPA contacted 
tribal officials early in the process of developing this regulation to 
permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. 
EPA invited tribal officials to consult during the development of the 
proposed rule and following signature of the proposed rule. As 
discussed in more detail in our proposed action, we sent letters to 
leaders of the tribes with areas of Indian country in the SJV 
nonattainment area inviting government-to-government consultation on 
the rulemaking effort. On February 17, 2015, EPA received a letter 
dated January 30, 2015 from the Tejon Tribe expressing an interest in 
developing a better understanding of, among other things, the effect of 
the reclassification on air quality. EPA invited the Tejon Tribe to 
participate in a conference call during the week of February 23, 2015, 
and EPA staff subsequently had preliminary conversations about this 
action with the Tribe but has not yet received confirmation of a 
request to schedule a conference call. No other Indian tribe has 
expressed an interest in discussing this action with EPA. We continue 
to invite Indian tribes in the SJV to contact EPA with any questions 
about the effects of this reclassification on tribal interests and air 
quality.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental 
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may 
disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered 
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it reclassifies 
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, which triggers additional Serious area planning 
requirements under the CAA. This action does not establish an 
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This final action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because 
it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This action is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of 
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) because it does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by 
this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse 
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or 
indigenous populations. This action reclassifies the SJV nonattainment 
area as Serious nonattainment for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, 
which triggers additional Serious area planning requirements under the 
CAA.

[[Page 18533]]

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective on May 7, 2015.

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 8, 2015. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, 
Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference.

    Dated: March 27, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Section 52.245 is amended by adding paragraph (c) as follows:


Sec.  52.245  New Source Review rules.

* * * * *
    (c) By May 7, 2016, the New Source Review rules for 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control 
District must be revised and submitted as a SIP revision. The rules 
must satisfy the requirements of sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) of the 
Clean Air Act.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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


0
4. Section 81.305 is amended as follows:
0
a. In the table titled ``California--1997 Annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
[Primary and secondary],'' revise the entries under ``San Joaquin 
Valley, CA''; and
0
b. In the table titled ``California--1997 24-Hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS [Primary and secondary],'' revise the entries under ``San Joaquin 
Valley, CA''.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  81.305  California.

* * * * *

                                       California--1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Designation \a\                          Classification
        Designated Area        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Date \1\             Type                Date \2\                Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
San Joaquin Valley, CA:
    Fresno County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Kern County (part)........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
        That portion of Kern
         County which lies
         west and north of a
         line described as
         follows: Beginning at
         the Kern-Los Angeles
         County boundary and
         running north and
         east along the
         northwest boundary of
         the Rancho La Libre
         Land Grant to the
         point of intersection
         with the range line
         common to R. 16 W.
         and R. 17 W., San
         Bernardino Base and
         Meridian; north along
         the range line to the
         point of intersection
         with the Rancho El
         Tejon Land Grant
         boundary; then
         southeast, northeast,
         and northwest along
         the boundary of the
         Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 3, T. 11 N., R. 17
         W.; then west 1.2
         miles; then north to
         the Rancho El Tejon
         Land Grant boundary;
         then northwest along
         the Rancho El Tejon
         line to the southeast
         corner of S. 34, T.
         32 S., R. 30 E.,
         Mount Diablo Base and
         Meridian; then north
         to the northwest
         corner of S. 35, T.
         31 S., R. 30 E.; then
         northeast along the
         boundary of the
         Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the
         southwest corner of
         S. 18, T. 31 S., R.
         31 E.; then east to
         the southeast corner
         of S. 13, T. 31 S.,
         R. 31 E.; then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E., Mount
         Diablo Base and
         Meridian, to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 6, T. 29 S., R. 32
         E.; then east to the
         southwest corner of
         S. 31, T. 28 S., R.
         32 E.; then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E. to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 6, T. 28 S., R. 32
         E., then west to the
         southeast corner of
         S. 36, T. 27 S., R.
         31 E., then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E. to the
         Kern-Tulare County
         boundary.

[[Page 18534]]

 
    Kings County..............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Madera County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Merced County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    San Joaquin County........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Stanislaus County.........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Tulare County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

                                      California--1997 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Designation \a\                          Classification
        Designated Area        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Date \1\             Type                Date \2\                Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
San Joaquin Valley, CA:
    Fresno County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Kern County (part)........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
        That portion of Kern
         County which lies
         west and north of a
         line described as
         follows: Beginning at
         the Kern-Los Angeles
         County boundary and
         running north and
         east along the
         northwest boundary of
         the Rancho La Libre
         Land Grant to the
         point of intersection
         with the range line
         common to R. 16 W.
         and R. 17 W., San
         Bernardino Base and
         Meridian; north along
         the range line to the
         point of intersection
         with the Rancho El
         Tejon Land Grant
         boundary; then
         southeast, northeast,
         and northwest along
         the boundary of the
         Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 3, T. 11 N., R. 17
         W.; then west 1.2
         miles; then north to
         the Rancho El Tejon
         Land Grant boundary;
         then northwest along
         the Rancho El Tejon
         line to the southeast
         corner of S. 34, T.
         32 S., R. 30 E.,
         Mount Diablo Base and
         Meridian; then north
         to the northwest
         corner of S. 35, T.
         31 S., R. 30 E.; then
         northeast along the
         boundary of the
         Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the
         southwest corner of
         S. 18, T. 31 S., R.
         31 E.; then east to
         the southeast corner
         of S. 13, T. 31 S.,
         R. 31 E.; then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E., Mount
         Diablo Base and
         Meridian, to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 6, T. 29 S., R. 32
         E.; then east to the
         southwest corner of
         S. 31, T. 28 S., R.
         32 E.; then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E. to the
         northwest corner of
         S. 6, T. 28 S., R. 32
         E., then west to the
         southeast corner of
         S. 36, T. 27 S., R.
         31 E., then north
         along the range line
         common to R. 31 E.
         and R. 32 E. to the
         Kern-Tulare County
         boundary.
    Kings County..............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Madera County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Merced County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    San Joaquin County........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Stanislaus County.........  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
    Tulare County.............  ..............  Nonattainment.......  May 7, 2015.........  Serious.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.


[[Page 18535]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-07765 Filed 4-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>