Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 4503 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EPA believes that this action does not 

have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous 

peoples, as specified in Executive Order 

12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The effect of this action triggers 

additional planning requirements under 

the CAA. 

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. 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 action for the 

purposes of judicial review, does not 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: January 6, 2022. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 52.1170, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry for 

‘‘Determination of failure to attain the 

2010 SO2 standard’’ immediately after 

the entry for ‘‘2010 Sulfur Dioxide Clean 

Data Determination’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory 

SIP provision 

Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Determination of failure 

to attain the 2010 SO2

standard.

Detroit area (Wayne 

County, part).

.................... 1/28/2022, [INSERT 

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION].

Triggers requirements of CAA section 179(d) for 

the State of Michigan to submit by January 30, 

2023, a revision to its SIP for the Detroit area 

that, among other elements, provides for expeditious attainment of the 2010 SO2 standard 

within the time period specified in CAA sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2). 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2022–00607 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

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 (PM2.5) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 

or ‘‘standards’’) in the San Joaquin 

Valley PM2.5 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 PM2.5 NAAQS and 

is disapproving the contingency 

measures element. The EPA is also 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
4504 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

1 86 FR 53150. 

2The 2018 PM2.5 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 PM2.5 Plan includes a 

revised version of Appendix H submitted by CARB 

as a technical correction on February 11, 2020. 

3The Valley State SIP Strategy was adopted by 

CARB on October 25, 2018. 

4EPA, 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 PM2.5 design values were 

available only for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

as the pollutant standard. Following our proposed 

action, the AQS system was updated to also report 

24-hour PM2.5 design values for the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 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 

PM2.5 NAAQS and the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The data values derived using the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS as the pollutant standard are the 

same as those derived for the EPA’s proposed action 

using the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 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 PM2.5 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 PM2.5 NAAQS as 

the pollutant standard are equal to or less than 65 

mg/m3 (i.e., the level of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS). The January 11, 2022 Design Value Report 

reflects the AQS system update to report 24-hour 

PM2.5 design values for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS as the pollutant standard. 

5Letter 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. 

7 Id. at 53173. 

finalizing a determination that the San 

Joaquin Valley air quality planning area 

has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

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 PM2.5

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 

PM2.5 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 

graham.ashleyr@epa.gov. 

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 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley 

PM2.5 nonattainment area.1 The San 

Joaquin Valley is classified as a Serious 

nonattainment area for the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS and is also subject to 

CAA section 189(d) requirements 

because of the failure of the area to 

attain the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 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. 

The SIP revisions on which we 

proposed action are those portions of 

the ‘‘2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 

2012 PM2.5 Standards’’ (‘‘2018 PM2.5

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 PM2.5

NAAQS. CARB submitted the 2018 

PM2.5 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 PM2.5

NAAQS collectively as the ‘‘SJV PM2.5

Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan.’’ The SJV PM2.5 Plan 

addresses the Serious area and CAA 

section 189(d) attainment plan 

requirements for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley, 

including the demonstration that the 

area would attain those NAAQS by 

December 31, 2020. 

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 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the 

Serious nonattainment area and CAA 

section 189(d) planning requirements 

for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 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 PM2.5 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

Because we proposed to determine 

that the San Joaquin Valley has attained 

the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 4505 

8 81 FR 58010, 58064 (August 24, 2016). 

9 75 FR 13710, 13713 (March 23, 2010). 

10 Id. 

11 86 FR 53150, 53173. 

12 Id. at 53178. 

13 Id. at 53175–53176. 

14 Id. 

15Comment received October 25, 2021, from the 

North American Insulation Manufacturer’s 

Association to Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2021– 

0261), including attachment. 

16EPA, 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. 

17As 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 PM2.5 Plan 

as meeting the subpart 4 RACM/reasonably 

available control technology requirement for the 

area. 

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 PM2.5 NAAQS 

by the attainment date, the postattainment 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 postattainment milestone year identified in 

the Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS.11

Similarly, because the EPA does not 

believe that it is necessary to 

demonstrate conformity using postattainment year budgets in areas that 

attain by the attainment date, we 

proposed that the requirement for postattainment year (i.e., 2023) motor 

vehicle emissions budgets would no 

longer apply in the area for the 1997 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS.12

Finally, the EPA proposed to 

disapprove the contingency measures 

element of the SJV PM2.5 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 PM2.5

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 PM2.5 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

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. 

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 PM2.5

NAAQS by the December 31, 2020 

attainment date, based on complete (or 

otherwise deemed sufficient), qualityassured, 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 PM2.5 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 PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as 

the EPA determines that the area meets 

the CAA requirements for redesignation 

to attainment. 

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 

PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

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); 

(c) the demonstration that the Plan 

will, at a minimum, achieve an annual 

five percent reduction in emissions of 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) 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; 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
4506 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

18Upon the effective date of this final rule, the 

newly-approved budgets will supersede the 

corresponding budgets for the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS that the EPA approved at 76 FR 69896 

(November 9, 2011). 

19See the 2018 PM2.5 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, NOX to PM2.5, for 

the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

20As 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 PM2.5 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 PM2.5 Plan 

for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS terminates our 

FIP obligation arising from the December 6, 2018 

determination with respect to the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 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 PM2.5 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 PM2.5

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. 

(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] 

County 

2017 (RFP Year) 2020 (Attainment Year) 

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). 

(4) We are also approving the trading 

mechanism in the SJV PM2.5 Plan for the 

1997 24-hour PM2.5 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: 

• Emissions sources included in the 

transportation conformity process; 

• Trades using NOX emissions 

reductions in excess of those needed to 

meet the NOX budget; 

• Trades in one direction from NOX

to direct PM2.5; and 

• A trading ratio of 2 tpd NOX to 1 

tpd PM2.5.19

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 PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 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 PM2.5 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. 

Lastly, based on our final 

determination that the San Joaquin 

Valley has attained the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2020 

attainment date, we are finalizing the 

determinations that the requirements for 

a post-attainment milestone, a postattainment year quantitative milestone 

report, and post-attainment year budgets 

no longer apply in the San Joaquin 

Valley nonattainment area for the 1997 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(537)(ii)(A)(8) and 

(c)(537)(ii)(B)(6) to read as follows: 

§ 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 PM2.5

Standards, Appendix H Revised 

February 11, 2020’’ (portions pertaining 

to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only, 

and excluding section H.3 

(‘‘Contingency Measures’’)). 

(B) * * * 

(6) 2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 

2012 PM2.5 Standards (‘‘2018 PM2.5

Plan’’), adopted November 15, 2018 

(portions pertaining to the 1997 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS only, and excluding 

Chapter 6 (‘‘Demonstration of Federal 

Requirements for 2006 PM2.5

Standards’’), Chapter 7 (‘‘Demonstration 

of Federal Requirements for 2012 PM2.5

Standards’’), and Appendix H, section 

H.3 (‘‘Contingency Measures’’)). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.237 is amended by 

adding paragraph (a)(12) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.237 Part D disapproval. 

(a) * * * 

(12) The contingency measures 

portion of the 2018 Plan for the 1997, 

2006, and 2012 PM2.5 Standards (‘‘2018 

PM2.5 Plan’’), adopted November 15, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
4508 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

2018, for San Joaquin Valley with 

respect to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 52.244 is amended by 

adding paragraph (f)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.244 Motor vehicle emissions budgets. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(3) San Joaquin Valley, for the 1997 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS only (years 2017 

and 2020 budgets only), approved 

February 28, 2022. 

■ 5. Section 52.247 is amended by 

adding paragraph (p) to read as follows: 

§ 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 PM2.5 nonattainment 

area has attained the 1997 24-hour PM2.5

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 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01728 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0391; FRL–8693–02– 

R7] 

Air Plan Approval; Missouri 

Redesignation Request and 

Associated Maintenance Plan for the 

Jefferson County 2010 SO2 1-Hour 

NAAQS Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: On December 27, 2017, the 

State of Missouri submitted a request for 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) to redesignate the Jefferson 

County, Missouri, 2010 1-hour sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

nonattainment area to attainment and to 

approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision containing a maintenance 

plan for the area. The State provided 

supplemental information on: May 15, 

2018; February 7, 2019; February 25, 

2019; and April 9, 2021. In response to 

these submittals, the EPA is taking the 

following final actions: Approve the 

State’s plan for maintaining attainment 

of the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary 

standard in the area; and approve the 

State’s request to redesignate the 

Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment 

area to attainment for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 primary standard. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

February 28, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0391. 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, i.e., 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 information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ashley Keas, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality 

Planning Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

(913) 551–7629 or by email at 

keas.ashley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What is being addressed in this document? 

II. The EPA’s Responses to Comments 

III. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

IV. What are the actions the EPA is taking? 

V. Environmental Justice Concerns 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

On December 27, 2017, the State 

submitted a request for redesignation of 

the Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment 

area to attainment and a SIP revision 

containing a 10-year maintenance plan 

for the area. On May 15, 2018, the State 

submitted a clarifying letter that 

Appendix A (containing the emissions 

inventory for the area) and Appendix B 

(containing a Consent Agreement 

entered between Missouri and Ameren 

sources in the area) of the SIP submittal 

should be considered part of the SIP 

revision request. On February 7, 2019, 

and February 25, 2019, the State 

submitted supplemental modeling 

information to the EPA. On April 9, 

2021, the State submitted an addendum 

to the Consent Agreement which 

contains the emissions limits and 

monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping requirements needed to 

determine compliance with the 

emissions limits for the covered sources. 

The EPA’s proposal at 86 FR 34177 

[June 29, 2021] discusses the EPA’s 

review of the redesignation request, the 

maintenance plan (including Consent 

Agreement and addendum), and the 

supplemental information and provides 

support for the EPA’s proposed 

approval of the request to redesignate 

the area to attainment and for proposed 

approval of the 10-year maintenance 

plan. Additional analysis of the 

redesignation request, 10-year 

maintenance plan, Consent Agreement 

and addendum, and supplemental 

modeling information is provided in a 

Technical Support Document (TSD) 

included in this docket. The public 

comment period on the EPA’s proposed 

rule opened on June 29, 2021, the date 

of its publication in the Federal 

Register, and closed on July 29, 2021. 

During this period, the EPA received 

one comment. The EPA additionally 

received a request to extend the 

comment period due to the technical 

support document being added to the 

docket partway through the comment 

period. Therefore, the EPA reopened the 

comment period on August 17, 2021, 

and closed on September 16, 2021 (86 

FR 45950). During this second comment 

period, the EPA received one additional 

comment. Both comments are addressed 

in section II. 

II. The EPA’s Responses to Comments 

Comment 1: On July 29, 2021, the 

EPA received a comment from Ameren 

Missouri. The comment was largely 

supportive of the EPA’s proposed 

redesignation of the Jefferson County 

area. Ameren also identified minor 

clarifications and corrections needed in 

the TSD. Specifically, Ameren noted 

that the TSD incorrectly stated that 

meteorological data was from the 

Weaver monitor when in fact the 

Weaver monitor does not collect 

meteorological data. 

Response 1: The EPA updated this 

reference to the Johnson Tall Tower, the 

source of the meteorological data 

underlying the pollution rose on page 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1