[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4503-4508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01728]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0261; FRL-8969-02-R9]


Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality 
Implementation Plans and Determination of Attainment by the Attainment 
Date; California; San Joaquin Valley Serious Area and Section 189(d) 
Plan for Attainment of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to approve in part and disapprove in part portions of state 
implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by California to address 
Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for the 1997 24-hour fine particulate 
matter (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 
or ``standards'') in the San Joaquin Valley PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
nonattainment area. Specifically, the EPA is approving all but the 
contingency measures element of the submitted SIP revisions as meeting 
all applicable ``Serious'' area and CAA section 189(d) requirements for 
the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and is disapproving the 
contingency measures element. The EPA is also

[[Page 4504]]

finalizing a determination that the San Joaquin Valley air quality 
planning area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by 
the applicable attainment date. This determination is based on 
sufficient, quality-assured, and certified data for 2018-2020. Based on 
our finding that the San Joaquin Valley area has attained the 1997 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, we are 
also finalizing a determination that the requirement for contingency 
measures will no longer apply to the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment 
area for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Lastly, the EPA is 
issuing a protective finding for transportation conformity 
determinations for the disapproval of the contingency measures element.

DATES: This rule is effective on February 28, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0261. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance 
in a language other than English or if you are a person with 
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, 
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office 
(ARD-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, 
(415) 972-3877, or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#325540535a535f1c53415a5e574b40725742531c555d44"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="274055464f464a0946544f4b425e556742574609404851">[email protected]</span></a>.

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

Table of Contents

I. Summary of Proposed Rule
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of Proposed Rule

    On September 24, 2021, the EPA proposed to approve in part and 
disapprove in part portions of SIP revisions submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB) to meet CAA requirements for the 
1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area.\1\ The San Joaquin Valley is 
classified as a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and is also subject to CAA section 189(d) 
requirements because of the failure of the area to attain the 1997 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the area's original Serious area 
attainment date (i.e., December 31, 2015). The EPA's determination that 
the area failed to attain the original December 31, 2015 attainment 
date triggered the requirement for the state to submit the SIP 
revisions on which the EPA is taking final action in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 86 FR 53150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIP revisions on which we proposed action are those portions of 
the ``2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Standards'' (``2018 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan'') \2\ and the ``San Joaquin 
Valley Supplement to the 2016 State Strategy for the State 
Implementation Plan'' (``Valley State SIP Strategy'') \3\ that pertain 
to the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. CARB submitted the 2018 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan and Valley State SIP Strategy to the EPA as a 
revision to the California SIP on May 10, 2019. We refer to the 
portions of these two SIP submissions that pertain to the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS collectively as the ``SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Plan'' or ``Plan.'' The SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan addresses the Serious 
area and CAA section 189(d) attainment plan requirements for the 1997 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley, including the 
demonstration that the area would attain those NAAQS by December 31, 
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The 2018 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan was adopted by the San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District on November 
15, 2018, and by CARB on January 24, 2019. The 2018 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Plan includes a revised version of Appendix H submitted by CARB as a 
technical correction on February 11, 2020.
    \3\ The Valley State SIP Strategy was adopted by CARB on October 
25, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA proposed to approve the 2013 base year emissions 
inventories, the precursor demonstration, the best available control 
measures/best available control technology (BACM/BACT) demonstration, 
the five percent annual emissions reduction demonstration, the 
attainment demonstration, the reasonable further progress (RFP) 
demonstration, and the quantitative milestones demonstration in the SJV 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan as meeting the Serious nonattainment area and CAA 
section 189(d) planning requirements for the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. We also proposed to approve the motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for 2017 and 2020 and the inter-pollutant trading 
mechanism provided for use in transportation conformity analyses.
    Based on complete (or otherwise deemed sufficient), quality-
assured, and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 
2018-2020 monitoring period, the EPA also proposed to determine that 
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area attained the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the December 31, 2020 attainment date.\4\ 
This determination was based in part on the EPA's July 13, 2021 
concurrence \5\ on a demonstration provided by CARB that a wildfire 
exceptional event contributed to exceedances at eight monitoring sites 
within the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area during August 20-24, 
2020, and exclusion of these data from our evaluation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report 
(``Design Value Report''), AMP480, accessed January 11, 2022. The 
Design Value Report excludes measurements with regionally concurred 
exceptional event flags. As discussed in our proposed action, at the 
time of our proposal, AQS reports for 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
design values were available only for the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as the pollutant standard. Following our 
proposed action, the AQS system was updated to also report 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS as the pollutant standard. 40 CFR part 50 Appendix N specifies 
the data handling and design value calculations for both the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. The data values derived using the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as the pollutant standard are the same as 
those derived for the EPA's proposed action using the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as the pollutant standard except for minor 
differences in the 2018 98th percentiles at the Bakersfield-Airport 
(Planz) (AQS ID: 06-029-0016) and Madera-Avenue 14 (AQS ID: 06-039-
2010) sites, and the 2020 design value at the Madera-Avenue 14 site, 
due to data handling differences related to the levels of the two 
standards. The 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values at all 
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for 
the 2018-2020 data period calculated using the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as the pollutant standard are equal to or 
less than 65 [micro]g/m\3\ (i.e., the level of the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS). The January 11, 2022 Design Value Report 
reflects the AQS system update to report 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
design values for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as the 
pollutant standard.
    \5\ Letter dated July 13, 2021, from Elizabeth J. Adams, 
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Michael 
Benjamin, Division Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, 
CARB.
    \6\ 86 FR 53150, 53183.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because we proposed to determine that the San Joaquin Valley has 
attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the December 31, 
2020 attainment date, we also proposed to determine that the 
requirement for a post-attainment milestone would no longer apply in 
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for these NAAQS.\7\ We 
explained that the purpose of the post-attainment quantitative 
milestone is to provide the EPA with the tools necessary to monitor

[[Page 4505]]

the area's continued progress toward attainment in the event the area 
fails to attain by the attainment date,\8\ and that once an area has 
attained the NAAQS, ``no further milestones are necessary or 
meaningful.'' \9\ Similarly, the section 189(c)(2) requirement to 
submit a quantitative milestone report no longer applies when the area 
has attained the standard.\10\ Accordingly, we proposed to find that 
upon a final determination that the San Joaquin Valley area has 
attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the attainment 
date, the post-attainment RFP milestone requirement will no longer 
apply and CARB would no longer be required to submit a quantitative 
milestone report for the San Joaquin Valley under 40 CFR 51.1013(b) for 
the purposes of the 2023 post-attainment milestone year identified in 
the Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at 53173.
    \8\ 81 FR 58010, 58064 (August 24, 2016).
    \9\ 75 FR 13710, 13713 (March 23, 2010).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 86 FR 53150, 53173.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, because the EPA does not believe that it is necessary to 
demonstrate conformity using post-attainment year budgets in areas that 
attain by the attainment date, we proposed that the requirement for 
post-attainment year (i.e., 2023) motor vehicle emissions budgets would 
no longer apply in the area for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. at 53178.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the EPA proposed to disapprove the contingency measures 
element of the SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan because of several 
deficiencies, including that the contingency provisions of the 
District's Rule 4901 (``Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning 
Heaters'') do not address the potential for failures to meet RFP, to 
meet a quantitative milestone, or to submit a quantitative milestone 
report.\13\ In addition, the contingency measure provisions of Rule 
4901 are not structured to achieve any additional emissions reductions 
if the EPA were to find that only certain counties in the San Joaquin 
Valley are violating the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as of the 
attainment date, and thus only provide for reductions under certain 
circumstances. However, the EPA also proposed to find that the 
contingency measures requirement for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS will no longer apply in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area 
if we finalize the determination that the area attained by the December 
31, 2020 attainment date. Because we proposed to approve the RFP 
analysis, the modeled attainment demonstration, and the motor vehicle 
emissions budgets, we also proposed to issue a protective finding under 
40 CFR 93.120(a)(3) in the event we finalize the disapproval of the 
contingency measures.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. at 53175-53176.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please see our September 24, 2021 proposed rule for additional 
background and a detailed explanation of the rationale for our proposed 
action.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period 
that ended on October 25, 2021. We received one set of comments in 
support of our proposal.\15\ These comments are included in the docket 
for this action and do not require a response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Comment received October 25, 2021, from the North American 
Insulation Manufacturer's Association to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2021-0261), including attachment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    For the reasons discussed in detail in our proposed action, the EPA 
is finalizing our determination that the San Joaquin Valley 
nonattainment area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
by the December 31, 2020 attainment date, based on complete (or 
otherwise deemed sufficient), quality-assured, and certified ambient 
air quality monitoring data for the 2018-2020 monitoring period.\16\ 
The EPA is taking this final action pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1) 
and 188(b)(2). This final determination that the San Joaquin Valley 
nonattainment area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
does not constitute a redesignation of the area to attainment. Under 
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), redesignations of nonattainment areas to 
attainment require states to meet a number of additional statutory 
criteria, including the EPA's approval of a SIP revision demonstrating 
maintenance of the standard for 10 years after redesignation. The 
designation status of the San Joaquin Valley area will remain Serious 
nonattainment for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS until such 
time as the EPA determines that the area meets the CAA requirements for 
redesignation to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ EPA, 2020 Air Quality System (AQS) Design Value Report, 
AMP480, accessed January 11, 2022. The Design Value Report excludes 
measurements with regionally concurred exceptional event flags.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, for the reasons discussed in detail in our proposed action, 
under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is taking final action to approve 
in part and disapprove in part portions of the SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the San Joaquin 
Valley nonattainment area as follows:
    (1) We are approving the following elements as meeting the Serious 
nonattainment area planning requirements:
    (a) The 2013 base year emissions inventories as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(b);
    (b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
section 189(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a);
    (c) the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
Plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable as meeting 
the requirements of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(b) and 40 CFR 
51.1011(b);
    (d) the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
sections 172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR 51.1012; and
    (e) the quantitative milestone demonstration as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013;
    (2) We are approving the following elements as meeting the CAA 
section 189(d) planning requirements:
    (a) The 2013 base year emissions inventories as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(c);
    (b) the BACM/BACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
sections 189(a)(1)(C) \17\ and 189(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1010(c);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ As discussed in the proposal, a section 189(d) plan must 
address any outstanding ``Moderate'' or Serious area requirements 
that have not previously been approved (86 FR 53150, 53154-53155). 
Because we have not previously approved a subpart 4 reasonably 
available control measure (RACM) demonstration for the San Joaquin 
Valley nonattainment area, we are also approving the BACM/BACT 
demonstration in the SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan as meeting the 
subpart 4 RACM/reasonably available control technology requirement 
for the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) the demonstration that the Plan will, at a minimum, achieve an 
annual five percent reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides 
(NO<INF>X</INF>) as meeting the requirements of CAA section 189(d) and 
40 CFR 51.1010(c);
    (d) the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
Plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable as meeting 
the requirements of CAA sections 179(d) and 189(d) and 40 CFR 
51.1011(b);
    (e) the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
sections 172(c)(2) and 171(1) and 40 CFR 51.1012; and
    (f) the quantitative milestone demonstration as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013;

[[Page 4506]]

    (3) We are approving the following motor vehicle emissions budgets 
for 2017 and 2020 as meeting the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 
40 CFR part 93, subpart A:

           Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1997 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
                                         [annual average, tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2017 (RFP Year)             2020 (Attainment Year)
                     County                      ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       PM2.5            NOX            PM2.5            NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno..........................................             0.9            28.5             0.9            25.3
Kern (San Joaquin Valley portion................             0.8            28.0             0.8            23.3
Kings...........................................             0.2             5.8             0.2             4.8
Madera..........................................             0.2             5.3             0.2             4.2
Merced..........................................             0.3            10.7             0.3             8.9
San Joaquin.....................................             0.7            14.9             0.6            11.9
Stanislaus......................................             0.4            11.9             0.4             9.6
Tulare..........................................             0.4            10.8             0.4             8.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2018 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix D, Table 3-1. Budgets are rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton.

    We are limiting the duration of our approval of the budgets to last 
until new budgets based on updated planning data and models have been 
submitted and the EPA has found the budgets to be adequate for 
conformity purposes. Upon the effective date of this final rule, the 
San Joaquin Valley metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and the 
U.S. Department of Transportation will be required to use the new 
budgets in transportation conformity determinations.\18\ In addition, 
for these conformity determinations, the motor vehicle emissions from 
implementation of the transportation plan must be projected and 
compared to the budgets at the same level of accuracy and using the 
same method as the budgets in the Plan. For example, emissions must be 
rounded up to the nearest tenth of a ton per day (tpd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Upon the effective date of this final rule, the newly-
approved budgets will supersede the corresponding budgets for the 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS that the EPA approved at 76 FR 69896 
(November 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) We are also approving the trading mechanism in the SJV 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS for 
use in transportation conformity analyses by the San Joaquin Valley 
MPOs as allowed for under 40 CFR 93.124(b). The trading applies only to 
the following:
    <bullet> Emissions sources included in the transportation 
conformity process;
    <bullet> Trades using NO<INF>X</INF> emissions reductions in excess 
of those needed to meet the NO<INF>X</INF> budget;
    <bullet> Trades in one direction from NO<INF>X</INF> to direct 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>; and
    <bullet> A trading ratio of 2 tpd NO<INF>X</INF> to 1 tpd 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See the 2018 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan, Appendix D, D-125 to D-
127. Upon the effective date of this final rule, the new trading 
ratio will replace the corresponding existing trading ratio of 9 to 
1, NO<INF>X</INF> to PM<INF>2.5</INF>, for the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Clear documentation of the calculations used in the trade must be 
included in the conformity analysis; and
    (5) We are disapproving the contingency measures element of the SJV 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS for 
both the Serious area and CAA section 189(d) planning requirements for 
failing to meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9). However, 
based on our finding of attainment by the applicable attainment date, 
we are also finalizing a determination that the contingency measures 
requirement no longer applies to the San Joaquin Valley area for the 
1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Therefore, this final action does 
not trigger sanctions or FIP clocks.\20\ In addition, because we are 
approving the RFP analysis, the modeled attainment demonstration, and 
the motor vehicle emissions budgets, we are issuing a protective 
finding for transportation conformity determinations under 40 CFR 
93.120(a)(3) in connection with the final disapproval of the 
contingency measures element.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ As noted in the proposed rule (86 FR 53150, 53152), on 
December 6, 2018 (83 FR 62720), the EPA determined that California 
had failed to submit a complete section 189(d) attainment plan for 
the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, among other required SIP 
submissions for the San Joaquin Valley, by the statutory deadlines. 
Among other things, this finding triggered the obligation under CAA 
section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a federal implementation 
plan (FIP) no later than two years after the finding, unless the 
State has submitted, and the EPA has approved, the required SIP 
submission. Our final action on the SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan for 
the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS terminates our FIP 
obligation arising from the December 6, 2018 determination with 
respect to the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in San Joaquin 
Valley. For all SIP elements other than the contingency measures, 
the FIP obligation is terminated by our approval of the relevant 
portions of the SJV PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan SIP as meeting the 
applicable requirements. For the contingency measures element, the 
FIP obligation is terminated based on our final determination that 
the area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date, and that as a result, the contingency 
measures requirement for that NAAQS no longer applies, and thus, 
there is no SIP deficiency for a FIP to correct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, based on our final determination that the San Joaquin 
Valley has attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the 
December 31, 2020 attainment date, we are finalizing the determinations 
that the requirements for a post-attainment milestone, a post-
attainment year quantitative milestone report, and post-attainment year 
budgets no longer apply in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area 
for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www.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 not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA because this partial approval and partial disapproval of SIP 
revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of themselves create 
any new information collection burdens but simply disapprove certain 
state requirements for inclusion in the SIP.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities

[[Page 4507]]

under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small 
entities. This partial approval and partial disapproval of SIP 
revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of themselves create 
any new requirements but simply disapprove certain state requirements 
for inclusion in the SIP.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action, in part, disapproves certain pre-
existing requirements under state or local law and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP revisions that the EPA is 
partially approving and partially disapproving do not apply on any 
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian 
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not 
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because this partial approval and partial 
disapproval of SIP revisions and finding of attainment do not in-and-of 
themselves create any new regulations but simply disapprove certain 
state requirements for inclusion in the SIP.

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

    This 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 (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA.

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

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this rulemaking.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action 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).

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by March 29, 2022. 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 CAA section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: January 24, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends chapter I, 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(537)(ii)(A)(8) 
and (c)(537)(ii)(B)(6) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (537) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (8) ``Appendix H, RFP, Quantitative Milestones, and Contingency, 
2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Standards, 
Appendix H Revised February 11, 2020'' (portions pertaining to the 1997 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS only, and excluding section H.3 
(``Contingency Measures'')).
    (B) * * *
    (6) 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Standards (``2018 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan''), adopted November 15, 2018 
(portions pertaining to the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS only, 
and excluding Chapter 6 (``Demonstration of Federal Requirements for 
2006 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Standards''), Chapter 7 (``Demonstration of 
Federal Requirements for 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Standards''), and 
Appendix H, section H.3 (``Contingency Measures'')).
* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.237 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(12) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.237  Part D disapproval.

    (a) * * *
    (12) The contingency measures portion of the 2018 Plan for the 
1997, 2006, and 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Standards (``2018 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Plan''), adopted November 15,

[[Page 4508]]

2018, for San Joaquin Valley with respect to the 1997 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 52.244 is amended by adding paragraph (f)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.244  Motor vehicle emissions budgets.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) San Joaquin Valley, for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
only (years 2017 and 2020 budgets only), approved February 28, 2022.

0
5. Section 52.247 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.247  Control Strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.

* * * * *
    (p) Determination of Attainment: Effective February 28, 2022, the 
EPA has determined that, based on 2018 to 2020 ambient air quality 
data, the San Joaquin Valley PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area has 
attained the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of December 31, 2020. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) to 
determine whether the area attained the standard. The EPA has also 
determined that, based on the determination of attainment by the 
applicable attainment date, the requirement of CAA section 172(c)(9) to 
provide for contingency measures no longer applies to the San Joaquin 
Valley area for the 1997 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

[FR Doc. 2022-01728 Filed 1-27-22; 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>