Vol. 80 Tuesday, 

No. 202 October 20, 2015 

Part II 

Environmental Protection Agency 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas 

for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast Moderate Area 

Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS; Proposed Rule 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63640 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1See 71 FR 61224 (October 17, 2006). The EPA 

set the first NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18, 1997 (62 

FR 36852), including annual standards of 15.0 mg/ 

m3 based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations and 24-hour (daily) standards of 65 

mg/m3 based on a 3-year average of 98th percentile 

24-hour concentrations (40 CFR 50.7). In 2012, the 

EPA revised the annual standard to lower its level 

to 12 mg/m3 (78 FR 3086, January 15, 2013, codified 

at 40 CFR 50.18). Unless otherwise noted, all 

references to the PM2.5 standard in this notice are 

to the 2006 24-hour standard of 35 mg/m3 codified 

at 40 CFR 50.13. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0204; FRL–9935–61– 

Region 9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Designation of 

Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; California; South Coast 

Moderate Area Plan and 

Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by California to 

address Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) 

requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air 

Basin (South Coast) Moderate PM2.5

nonattainment area. These SIP revisions 

are the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, submitted 

February 13, 2013, and the 2015 

Supplement, submitted March 4, 2015. 

The EPA is also proposing to reclassify 

the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment 

area, including reservation areas of 

Indian Country and any other area of 

Indian Country within it where the EPA 

or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe 

has jurisdiction, as a Serious 

nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS based on EPA’s determination 

that the area cannot practicably attain 

this standard by the applicable 

Moderate area attainment date of 

December 31, 2015. Upon final 

reclassification as a Serious area, 

California will be required to submit a 

Serious area plan including a 

demonstration that the plan provides for 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

the applicable Serious area attainment 

date, which is no later than December 

31, 2019, or by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable, in 

accordance with the requirements of 

part D of Title I of the CAA. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

November 19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2015–0204, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

• Email: tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Wienke Tax, Office 

of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and the 

EPA will not know your identity or 

contact information unless you provide 

it in the body of your comment. If you 

send email directly to the EPA, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

public comment. If the EPA cannot read 

your comments due to technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for 

clarification, the EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket 

(docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2015– 

0204) for this proposed rule 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 only at the hard copy location 

(e.g., copyrighted material), and some 

may not be publicly available at either 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR– 

2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 9, (415) 947–4192, 

tax.wienke@epa.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background for Proposed Actions 

II. Clean Air Act Requirements for Moderate 

PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Plans 

III. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements 

for SIP Submittals 

IV. Review of the South Coast 2012 PM2.5

Plan and 2015 Supplement 

A. Emissions Inventory 

B. Air Quality Modeling 

C. PM2.5 Precursors 

D. Reasonably Available Control Measures/ 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology 

E. Major Stationary Source Control 

Requirements Under CAA Section 189(e) 

F. Adopted Control Strategy 

G. Demonstration that Attainment by the 

Moderate Area Attainment Date is 

Impracticable 

H. Reasonable Further Progress and 

Quantitative Milestones 

I. Contingency Measures 

J. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

K. General Conformity Budgets 

V. Proposed Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Serious Area SIP 

Requirements 

VI. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of 

Indian Country 

VII. Summary of Proposed Actions and 

Request for Public Comment 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background for Proposed Actions 

On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised 

the 24-hour national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS or standard) for 

PM2.5, particulate matter with a 

diameter of 2.5 microns or less, to 

provide increased protection of public 

health by lowering its level from 65 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 

35 mg/m3 (40 CFR 50.13).1

Epidemiological studies have shown 

statistically significant correlations 

between elevated PM2.5 levels and 

premature mortality. Other important 

health effects associated with PM2.5

exposure include aggravation of 

respiratory and cardiovascular disease 

(as indicated by increased hospital 

admissions, emergency room visits, 

absences from school or work, and 

restricted activity days), changes in lung 

function and increased respiratory 

symptoms. Individuals particularly 

sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include 

older adults, people with heart and lung 

disease, and children (78 FR 3086 at 

3088, January 15, 2013). PM2.5 can be 

emitted directly into the atmosphere as 

a solid or liquid particle (‘‘primary 

PM2.5’’ or ‘‘direct PM2.5’’) or can be 

formed in the atmosphere as a result of 

various chemical reactions among 

precursor pollutants such as nitrogen 

oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63641 

2See EPA, Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 

Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for Particulate Matter (EPA–452/R–12– 

005, December 2012), p. 2–1. 

3See 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005) and 40 CFR 

81.305. In November 2007, California submitted the 

2007 PM2.5 Plan to provide for attainment of the 

1997 PM2.5 standards in the South Coast. In 

November 2011, the EPA approved all but the 

contingency measures in the 2007 PM2.5 Plan (76 FR 

69928, November 9, 2011). In November 2011 and 

April 2013, the State submitted a revised 

contingency measure plan, which the EPA 

approved on October 29, 2013 (78 FR 64402, 

October 29, 2013). 

4See EPA, Air Quality System Report dated 

September 28, 2015 in the docket for today’s action. 

‘‘Design value’’ means the calculated concentration 

according to the applicable appendix of 40 CFR part 

50 for the highest site in an attainment or 

nonattainment area (40 CFR 58.1). 

5Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002(c), the EPA 

provided, among other things, that a state was ‘‘not 

required to address VOC [and ammonia] as . . . 

PM2.5 attainment plan precursor[s] and to evaluate 

sources of VOC [and ammonia] emissions in the 

State for control measures,’’ unless the State or the 

EPA provided an appropriate technical 

demonstration showing that emissions from sources 

of these pollutants ‘‘significantly contribute’’ to 

PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area (40 

CFR 51.1002(c)(3) and (4) and 72 FR 20586 at 

20589–97 (April 25, 2007)). 

6See Memorandum, dated March 2, 2012 

(withdrawn June 6, 2013), from Stephen D. Page, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, to EPA Regional Air Directors, Regions 

I–X re: ‘‘Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24- 

Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (‘‘2012 Guidance’’) 

Available at: http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_

guide.html. 

7See CAA section 172(b) and 40 CFR 51.1002(a). 

8See letter dated February 13, 2013, from James 

N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, to Jared 

Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9,, with attachments, and CARB Board Resolution 

13–3. 

9The NRDC decision also remanded the EPA’s 

2008 final rule to implement the nonattainment 

New Source Review (NNSR) permitting 

requirements for PM2.5 (73 FR 28231, May 16, 2008) 

which, like the 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, 

was premised on the requirements of subpart 1. 

Today’s proposal does not address requirements for 

NNSR programs. 

10See 79 FR 69806, 69809 (November 21, 2013) 

and 79 FR 31566, 31568 (June 2, 2014). 

compounds, and ammonia (‘‘secondary 

PM2.5’’).2

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by 

CAA section 107(d) to designate areas 

throughout the nation as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 

2009, the EPA designated the South 

Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 standard of 35 mg/m3 (74 FR 

58688, November 13, 2009). This 

designation became effective on 

December 14, 2009 (40 CFR 81.305). The 

South Coast area is also designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 

24-hour PM2.5 standards.3 On June 2, 

2014, the EPA classified the South Coast 

area as Moderate nonattainment for both 

the 1997 PM2.5 standards and the 2006 

PM2.5 standard under subpart 4 of part 

D, title I of the Act (79 FR 31566). 

The South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment 

area is home to about 17 million people, 

has a diverse economic base, and 

contains one of the highest-volume port 

areas in the world. For a precise 

description of the geographic 

boundaries of the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.305. 

Ambient PM2.5 levels in the South 

Coast have declined considerably in the 

past 15 years to levels just above the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. For the 2011–2013 

period, the 24-hour PM2.5 design value 

for the area, based on monitored 

readings at the Mira Loma monitor, is 36 

ug/m3.4

The local air district with primary 

responsibility for developing a plan to 

attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this 

area is the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (District or 

SCAQMD). The District works 

cooperatively with the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB) in preparing 

these plans. Authority for regulating 

sources under state jurisdiction in the 

South Coast is split between the District, 

which has responsibility for regulating 

stationary and most area sources, and 

CARB, which has responsibility for 

regulating most mobile sources. 

II. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area 

Plans 

In April 2007, the EPA issued the 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule (‘‘2007 PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule’’) to assist states with the 

development of SIPs to meet the Act’s 

attainment planning requirements for 

the 1997 PM2.5 standards (72 FR 20583, 

April 25, 2007, codified at 40 CFR part 

51, subpart Z). This rule was premised 

on the EPA’s prior interpretation of the 

Act as allowing for implementation of 

the PM2.5 NAAQS solely pursuant to the 

general nonattainment area provisions 

in subpart 1 of part D, title I of the CAA 

(‘‘subpart 1’’) and not the more specific 

provisions for particulate matter 

nonattainment areas in subpart 4 of part 

D, title I of the Act (‘‘subpart 4’’). 

Among other things, the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule included 

nationally-applicable presumptions 

regarding the need to evaluate and 

potentially control emissions of certain 

PM2.5 precursors.5

In March of 2012, the EPA issued a 

guidance document to aid states in 

preparing SIPs to meet the Act’s 

attainment planning requirements for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard.6 The 

2012 guidance was based, in large part, 

on the requirements in the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule, which the EPA 

based solely upon the statutory 

requirements of subpart 1. 

California had three years from the 

December 14, 2009 effective date of the 

South Coast’s designation as 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard to submit a SIP for the South 

Coast that addressed the applicable 

requirements of the Act.7 On December 

19, 2012, the District adopted the Final 

2012 Air Quality Management Plan 

(AQMP), which addressed attainment of 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, among other 

CAA requirements. We refer herein to 

the portions of the 2012 AQMP that 

address attainment of the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS as the ‘‘2012 PM2.5 Plan.’’ On 

January 25, 2013, CARB adopted the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan as an element of the 

California SIP and submitted it to the 

EPA on February 13, 2013.8

On January 4, 2013, several weeks 

after the District’s adoption of the Plan, 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC 

Circuit issued its decision in a challenge 

to the EPA’s 2007 PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule (NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. 

Cir. 2013)). In NRDC, the court held that 

the EPA erred in implementing the 1997 

PM2.5 standards solely pursuant to the 

general implementation requirements of 

subpart 1, without also considering the 

requirements specific to particulate 

matter nonattainment areas in subpart 

4.9 The court reasoned that the plain 

meaning of the CAA requires 

implementation of the 1997 PM2.5

standards under subpart 4 because PM2.5

particles fall within the statutory 

definition of PM10 and are thus subject 

to the same statutory requirements as 

PM10. The court remanded the 2007 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule in its 

entirety, including the presumptions 

concerning VOC and ammonia in 40 

CFR 51.1002, and instructed the EPA 

‘‘to repromulgate these rules pursuant to 

Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.’’ 

Consistent with the NRDC decision, 

on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), the EPA 

published a final rule classifying all 

areas currently designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006 

PM2.5 standards as ‘‘Moderate’’ under 

subpart 4 and establishing a deadline of 

December 31, 2014 for states to submit 

any attainment-related and 

nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) SIP elements required for these 

areas pursuant to subpart 4. The EPA 

provided its rationale for these actions 

in both the proposed and final 

classification/deadline rule.10

On February 6, 2015, the District 

adopted the ‘‘Supplement to the 24- 

Hour PM2.5 State Implementation Plan 

for the South Coast Air Basin’’ (‘‘2015 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63642 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

11See footnote 8. 

12See Letter dated March 4, 2015 from Richard 

W. Corey, Executive Officer, California Air 

Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator EPA Region 9, with attachments, and 

CARB Resolution 15–3. 

13See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Public hearing notices, 

SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 12–19, ‘‘A 

Resolution of the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (AQMD or District) Governing 

Board Certifying the Final Program Environmental 

Impact Report for the 2012 Air Quality Management 

Plan (AQMP), adopting the Draft final 2012 AQMP, 

to be referred to after Adoption as the Final 2012 

AQMP, and to be submitted into the California State 

Implementation Plan,’’ December 7, 2012. 

14See CARB Resolution 13–3, ‘‘South Coast Air 

Basin 2012 PM2.5 and Ozone State Implementation 

Plans,’’ January 25, 2013. 

15See Notice of Public Hearing to Adopt 

Supplemental Document to the 2012 PM2.5 Plan for 

the 2006 PM2.5 Standard. 

16See CARB, Notice of Public Meeting to 

Consider a Minor Revision to the South Coast 2012 

PM2.5 State Implementation Plan, and CARB Board 

Resolution 15–2, February 19, 2015. 

Supplement’’ or ‘‘Supplement’’) as a 

revision to the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 

District adopted the Supplement to 

address subpart 4 requirements for the 

2006 PM2.5 standard to the extent that 

these requirements were not adequately 

addressed in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. CARB 

submitted the Supplement to the EPA 

on March 4, 2015. The Supplement 

includes information on the 

implementation of reasonably available 

controls for ammonia sources in the 

South Coast and the District’s 

demonstration that the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

and 2015 Supplement satisfy the 

requirements of subpart 4. As a 

consequence of the NRDC decision, we 

are reviewing the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

2015 Supplement for compliance with 

the applicable requirements of both 

subpart 1 and subpart 4. 

The EPA provided its preliminary 

views on the CAA’s requirements for 

particulate matter plans under part D, 

title I of the Act in ‘‘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) 

(‘‘General Preamble’’) and ‘‘State 

Implementation Plans for Serious PM– 

10 Nonattainment Areas, and 

Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

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) 

(‘‘Addendum’’). The General Preamble 

at 13538 discusses the relationship of 

subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP 

requirements, and notes that attainment 

plans for moderate nonattainment areas 

must meet the general provisions in 

subpart 1 to the extent that these 

provisions are not otherwise ‘‘subsumed 

by, or integrally related to, the more 

specific [subpart 4] requirements.’’ 

Some subpart 1 provisions have no 

subpart 4 equivalent (e.g., the emission 

inventories (CAA section 172(c)(3)) and 

contingency measures (CAA section 

172(c)(9)) and for these provisions, 

subpart 1 continues to govern. Other 

provisions of subpart 1 are subsumed or 

superseded by more specific 

requirements in subpart 4 (e.g., certain 

provisions concerning attainment 

dates). 

Additionally, in a proposed rule 

published March 23, 2015 (80 FR 

15340), the EPA provided further 

interpretive guidance on the statutory 

SIP requirements that apply to areas 

designated nonattainment for the PM2.5

standards (hereafter ‘‘Proposed PM2.5

Implementation Rule’’). We discuss 

these preliminary interpretations of the 

Act as appropriate in our evaluation of 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement in section IV of this 

proposed rule. 

III. Clean Air Act Procedural 

Requirements for SIP Submittals 

We are proposing action on two 

California SIP submittals. The first is the 

‘‘2012 PM2.5 Plan,’’ submitted on 

February 13, 2013, and the second is the 

2015 Supplement, submitted on March 

4, 2015.11 12

CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 

110(l) require each state to provide 

reasonable public notice and 

opportunity for public hearing prior to 

the adoption and submittal of a SIP or 

SIP revision. To meet this requirement, 

every SIP submittal should include 

evidence that adequate public notice 

was given and an opportunity for a 

public hearing was provided consistent 

with the EPA’s implementing 

regulations in 40 CFR 51.102. 

Both the District and CARB satisfied 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements for reasonable public 

notice and hearing prior to adoption and 

submittal of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 

District conducted public workshops, 

provided public comment periods, and 

held a public hearing prior to the 

adoption of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan on 

December 7, 2012.13 CARB provided the 

required public notice and opportunity 

for public comment prior to its January 

25, 2013 public hearing on the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan.14 The SIP submittal 

includes proof of publication of notices 

for these public hearings. We find, 

therefore, that the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

meets the procedural requirements for 

public notice and hearing in CAA 

sections 110(a) and 110(l). 

The District adopted the 2015 

Supplement after reasonable public 

notice and hearing.15 CARB adopted the 

Supplement for submittal as a SIP 

revision at its February 19, 2015 Board 

meeting after reasonable public notice.16

CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the 

EPA to determine whether a SIP 

submittal is complete within 60 days of 

receipt. This section also provides that 

any plan that the EPA has not 

affirmatively determined to be complete 

or incomplete will become complete by 

operation of law six months after the 

date of submittal. The EPA’s SIP 

completeness criteria are found in 40 

CFR part 51, Appendix V. A 

completeness review allows us to 

determine if the submittal includes all 

the necessary items and information we 

need to evaluate and act on it for 

substantive compliance with applicable 

requirements. 

The February 13, 2013 submittal of 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan became complete by 

operation of law on August 13, 2014. 

The 2015 Supplement became complete 

by operation of law on September 4, 

2015 (see our Technical Support 

Document (TSD) at section I.B). 

IV. Review of the South Coast 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

We summarize our evaluation of the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

below. Our detailed evaluation can be 

found in the TSD for this proposal 

which is available online at 

www.regulations.gov in docket number 

EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0204, on EPA 

Region 9’s Web site at http://www.epa.

gov/region9/air/actions/southcoast/

#PM25, or from the EPA contact listed 

at the beginning of this notice. 

A. Emissions Inventory 

1. Requirements for Emissions 

Inventories 

CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that 

each SIP include a ‘‘comprehensive, 

accurate, current inventory of actual 

emissions from all sources of the 

relevant pollutant or pollutants in [the] 

area . . . .’’ By requiring an accounting 

of actual emissions from all sources of 

the relevant pollutants in the area, this 

section provides for the base year 

inventory to include all emissions that 

contribute to the formation of a 

particular NAAQS pollutant. For the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, this 

includes direct PM2.5 as well as the 

main chemical precursors to the 

formation of secondary PM2.5: NOX, 

SO2, VOC, and ammonia (NH3). Primary 

PM2.5 includes condensable and 

filterable particulate matter. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63643 

17See http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/

compliance/annual-emission-reporting. 

18AP–42 is EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollutant 

Emission Factors, and has been published since 

1972 as the primary source of EPA’s emission factor 

information. It contains emission factors and 

process information for more than 200 air pollution 

source categories. A source category is a specific 

industry sector or group of similar emitting sources. 

The emission factors have been developed and 

compiled from source test data, material balance 

studies, and engineering estimates. 

19EMFAC2011 was approved for use in SIPs and 

conformity on March 6, 2013 (see 78 FR 14533). 

A state should include in its SIP 

submittal documentation explaining 

how the emissions data were calculated. 

In estimating mobile source emissions, 

a state should use the latest emissions 

models and planning assumptions 

available at the time the SIP is 

developed. At the time the 2012 PM2.5

Plan and 2015 Supplement were 

developed, California was required to 

use EMFAC2011 to estimate tailpipe 

and brake and tire wear emissions of 

PM2.5, NOX, SO2, and VOC from on-road 

mobile sources (78 FR 14533, March 6, 

2013). States are required to use the 

EPA’s AP–42 road dust method for 

calculating re-entrained road dust 

emissions from paved roads (76 FR 

6328, February 4, 2011). 

In addition to the base year inventory 

submitted to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 172(c)(3), the state must 

also submit future ‘‘baseline 

inventories’’ for the projected 

attainment year and each reasonable 

further progress (RFP) milestone year, 

and any other year of significance for 

meeting applicable CAA requirements. 

By ‘‘baseline inventories’’ (also referred 

to as ‘‘projected baseline inventories’’), 

we mean projected emissions 

inventories for future years that account 

for, among other things, the ongoing 

effects of economic growth and adopted 

emissions control requirements. The SIP 

submission should include 

documentation explaining how the 

emissions projections were calculated. 

2. Emissions Inventories in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan 

The annual average planning 

inventories for direct PM2.5 and all 

PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SOX, VOC, and 

ammonia) for the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area together with 

documentation for the inventories are 

found in Chapter 3 and Appendices III 

and V of the South Coast 2012 PM2.5

Plan and in Attachment A to the 2015 

Supplement. Additional inventory 

documentation specific to the air quality 

modeling is in Appendix V. Annual 

average inventories are provided for the 

2008 base year, and for future years 

2014 and the PM2.5 attainment year of 

2015. (Additional years such as 2017, 

2019, 2023 and 2030 are also provided, 

but these inventories are largely for the 

purposes of ozone attainment.) Baseline 

inventories reflect all control measures 

adopted by the District prior to June 

2012 and by CARB prior to August 

2011. Growth factors used to project 

these baseline inventories are derived 

mainly from data obtained from the 

Southern California Association of 

Governments (SCAG), the metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) for the Los 

Angeles area (2012 PM2.5 Plan, page 3– 

1). 

Each inventory includes emissions 

from point, area, on-road, and non-road 

sources. Stationary sources include 

point and area sources. Point sources in 

the South Coast air basin that emit 4 

tons per year or more of VOC, NOX, SOX

or PM report annual emissions to the 

District. Point source emissions for the 

2008 base year emission inventory were 

based on emissions reported from the 

SCAQMD’s Annual Emissions Reporting 

Program.17 Area sources include smaller 

emissions sources distributed across the 

nonattainment area. CARB and the 

District estimate emissions for about 400 

area source categories using activity 

information and emission factors. 

Activity data may come from national 

survey data or reports (e.g., from the 

DOE Energy Information 

Administration) or local sources such as 

the Southern California Gas Company, 

paint suppliers, and District databases. 

Emission factors can be based on a 

number of sources including source 

tests, compliance reports, and EPA’s 

AP–42.18

Emissions inventories are constantly 

being revised and improved. Between 

the finalization of the South Coast 2007 

AQMP and the development of the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan, the District added new area 

source categories such as liquefied 

petroleum gas (LPG) transmission 

losses, storage tank and pipeline 

cleaning and degassing, and 

architectural colorants to the inventories 

in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. We provide 

more detail on these updates and 

revisions in section II.A. of the TSD. 

The on-road mobile inventories use 

EMFAC2011 for estimating motor 

vehicle emissions (2012 PM2.5 Plan, p. 

3–1).19 Since EMFAC2011 was released 

in 2011, CARB has adopted additional 

regulations to control air pollution from 

mobile sources. For the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

the State adjusted EMFAC2011 

emissions estimates for the advanced 

clean cars program, reformulated 

gasoline rules, and Smog Check program 

to reflect these new measures (2012 

PM2.5 Plan, p. 3–5). Re-entrained paved 

road dust emissions were calculated 

using EPA’s AP–42 road dust 

methodology (2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

Appendix III, p. III–1–13 and 2015 

Supplement, Attachment B). SCAG, the 

MPO for the Los Angeles area, provided 

transportation activity data from the 

adopted 2012 Regional Transportation 

Plan (RTP). 

Off-road emissions such as 

construction, mining, gardening and 

agricultural equipment emissions were 

calculated using CARB’s 2011 In-Use 

Off-Road Fleet Inventory Model. The 

off-road equipment population was 

adjusted due to the recession, and 

equipment hours of use were adjusted 

based on reported activity. Equipment 

load factors were updated using a 2009 

academic study and information 

provided by engine manufacturers. 

External adjustments were made to 

CARB’s off-road emissions estimates for 

locomotives, large-spark ignition 

engines, and nonagricultural internal 

combustion engines. CARB also 

calculated emissions from ocean-going 

vessels, commercial harbor craft, 

locomotives, and cargo handling 

equipment. Locomotive emissions 

reflect EPA regulations effective in 2008 

and adjustments due to economic 

activity. The District estimated aircraft 

emissions. Future emissions forecasts 

are based largely on growth forecasts 

(demographic and economic 

information) from SCAG. 

A summary of the Plan’s 2008 base 

year inventory and the 2014 projected 

inventory is provided in Table 1 below. 

For a more detailed discussion of the 

inventories, see the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

Appendix III. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63644 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FOR THE SOUTH COAST PM2.5 NONATTAINMENT AREA

[Annual average in tons per day] 

2008 2014 

Direct PM2.5

Stationary and Area Sources .................................................................................................................................. 48 50 

On-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 19 12 

Off-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 13 8 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 80 70 

Nitrogen Oxides 

Stationary and Area Sources .................................................................................................................................. 92 77 

On-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 462 272 

Off-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 204 157 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 758 506 

Sulfur Dioxide 

Stationary and Area Sources .................................................................................................................................. 14 12 

On-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 2 2 

Off-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 38 4 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 54 18 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

Stationary and Area Sources .................................................................................................................................. 257 234 

On-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 209 117 

Off-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 127 100 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 593 451 

Ammonia 

Stationary and Area Sources .................................................................................................................................. 88.7 85.6 

On-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 19.9 16.5 

Off-Road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ 0.1 0.1 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 108.9 102.1 

Source: South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 3, Tables 3–2A, 3–4A, Appendix III, Table III–1–5, and 2008 ammonia inventory from Appendix 

V, Table V–4–2. 

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

The emissions inventories in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan were made available to the 

public for comment and were subject to 

public hearing at both the District and 

State levels. See SCAQMD Governing 

Board Resolution 12–19, p. 3 and CARB 

Resolution 13–3, p. 4. 

The inventories in the South Coast 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

are based on the most current and 

accurate information available to the 

State and District at the time the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and its inventories were 

being developed, including the latest 

EPA-approved version of California’s 

mobile source emissions model, 

EMFAC2011, and the EPA’s most recent 

AP–42 methodology for paved road 

dust. The inventories comprehensively 

address all source categories in the 

South Coast and were developed 

consistent with the EPA’s inventory 

guidance. For these reasons, we are 

proposing to approve the 2008 base year 

emissions inventory in the 2012 PM2.5

Plan as meeting the requirements of 

CAA section 172(c)(3). We also propose 

to find that the baseline inventories in 

the Plan provide an adequate basis for 

the reasonably available control 

measure (RACM), RFP, and 

impracticability demonstrations in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan. 

B. Air Quality Modeling 

1. Requirements for Air Quality 

Modeling 

CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requires 

each State in which a Moderate area is 

located to submit a plan that includes a 

demonstration either (i) that the plan 

will provide for attainment by the 

applicable attainment date, or (ii) that 

attainment by that date is impracticable. 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 2015 Supplement, 

and July 28, 2015 letter include a 

demonstration that attainment by the 

Moderate attainment date is 

impracticable. 

Air quality modeling is used to 

establish attainment emissions targets, 

the combination of emissions of PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors that the area can 

accommodate and still attain the 

standard, and to assess whether the 

proposed control strategy will result in 

attainment of the standard. Air quality 

modeling is performed for a base year 

and compared to air quality monitoring 

data collected during that year in order 

to determine model performance. Once 

the performance is determined to be 

acceptable, future year changes to the 

emissions inventory are simulated with 

the model to determine the relationship 

between emissions reductions and 

changes in ambient air quality. To 

project future design values, the model 

response to emission reductions, in the 

form of Relative Response Factors 

(RRFs), is applied to monitored design 

values from the base year. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63645 

20The EPA modeling guidance is available on 

EPA’s SCRAM Web site, Web page: http://www.epa.

gov/scram001/guidance_sip.htm; direct links: 

http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/

final-03-pm-rh-guidance.pdf and http://www.epa.

gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/Update_to_the_24- 

hour_PM25_Modeled_Attainment_Test.pdf. 

21See letter dated July 28, 2015, from Barry R. 

Wallerstein, Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to 

Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, US 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. 

22EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter 

(EPA/600/P–99/002aF, October 2004), Chapter 3. 

23EPA, Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final 

Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for Particulate Matter (EPA–452/R–12– 

005, December 2012), p. 2–1. 

For demonstrating attainment, the 

EPA’s recommendations for model 

input preparation, model performance 

evaluation, use of the model output for 

the attainment demonstration, and 

modeling documentation are described 

in Guidance on the Use of Models and 

Other Analyses for Demonstrating 

Attainment of Air Quality Goals for 

Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze, EPA– 

454/B–07–002, April 2007 (‘‘Modeling 

Guidance’’), as amended by ‘‘Update to 

the 24 Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Modeled 

Attainment Test,’’ Memorandum dated 

June 28, 2011, from Tyler Fox, Air 

Quality Modeling Group, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, EPA to 

Regional Air Program Managers, EPA 

(‘‘Modeling Guidance Update’’).20 As 

discussed below, the Modeling 

Guidance recommends supplemental air 

quality analyses. These may be used as 

part of a Weight of Evidence analysis 

(WOEA), which assesses attainment 

projections by considering evidence 

other than the main air quality modeling 

attainment test. 

The EPA has not issued modeling 

guidance specific to impracticability 

demonstrations but believes that a state 

seeking to make such a demonstration 

generally should provide air quality 

modeling similar to that required for an 

attainment demonstration. The main 

difference is that for an impracticability 

demonstration, the implementation of 

the SIP control strategy (including 

RACM) does not result in attainment of 

the standard by the Moderate area 

attainment date. 

For an attainment demonstration, a 

thorough review of all modeling inputs 

and assumptions (including consistency 

with EPA guidance) is especially 

important, since the modeling must 

ultimately support a conclusion that the 

plan (including its control strategy) will 

provide for timely attainment of the 

applicable NAAQS. In contrast, for an 

impracticability demonstration, the end 

point is a reclassification to Serious, 

which triggers the requirement for a 

new Serious Area attainment plan with 

a new air quality modeling analysis, and 

a new control strategy. See CAA section 

189(b)(1). Thus, the Serious Area 

planning process would provide an 

opportunity to refine the modeling 

analysis and/or correct any technical 

shortcomings in the impracticability 

demonstration. Therefore, the burden of 

proof will generally be lower for an 

impracticability demonstration 

compared to an attainment 

demonstration. 

2. Air Quality Modeling in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement contain a demonstration of 

attainment by the Moderate area 

attainment date, which is December 31, 

2015. SCAQMD developed a modeling 

protocol for the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, which 

EPA reviewed during the District’s 

development of the Plan. The Plan 

discusses air quality modeling in 

Chapter 5, ‘‘Future Air Quality,’’ and in 

detail in Appendix V, ‘‘Modeling and 

Attainment Demonstrations.’’ The 2012 

PM2.5 Plan’s attainment demonstration 

was based on photochemical modeling 

with the Community Multiscale Air 

Quality (CMAQ) model, using routinely 

available meteorological and air quality 

data as input. The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

the 2015 Supplement contain an 

unmonitored area analysis as well as a 

weight of evidence (WOE) 

demonstration. The WOE demonstration 

in the 2015 Supplement accounts to 

some extent for the effect of the drought 

on ambient PM2.5 levels in the South 

Coast. 

In a letter dated July 28, 2015, the 

SCAQMD requested that EPA reclassify 

the South Coast Air Basin as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring data 

indicating that attainment is not 

practicable by the Moderate area 

attainment date, which is December 31, 

2015.21 The SCAQMD also requested 

that the EPA treat the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

and 2015 Supplement, together with the 

air quality data provided in the July 28, 

2015 letter, as a demonstration that the 

area cannot practicably attain by the 

Moderate area attainment date. 

Based on the request from the 

SCAQMD, the modeled attainment 

demonstration provided in the Plan, the 

2015 Supplement, and the monitoring 

data provided in the July 28, 2015 letter, 

we are evaluating the State’s submittal 

as a demonstration that attainment by 

the Moderate area attainment date is 

impracticable. We provide a more 

detailed evaluation of the air quality 

modeling in the Plan in section II.B. of 

our TSD. 

3. Conclusion on Air Quality Modeling 

Given the Plan’s extensive discussion 

of modeling procedures, tests, and 

performance analyses consistent with 

EPA’s guidance in the Modeling 

Protocol, and the good model 

performance, EPA finds that the 

modeling is adequate for purposes of 

supporting the RACM demonstration, 

the RFP demonstration, and the 

demonstration of impracticability in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and Supplement. 

C. PM2.5 Precursors 

1. Requirements for the Control of PM2.5

Precursors 

The composition of PM2.5 is complex 

and highly variable due in part to the 

large contribution of secondary PM2.5 to 

total fine particle mass in most 

locations, and to the complexity of 

secondary particle formation processes. 

A large number of possible chemical 

reactions, often non-linear in nature, 

can convert gaseous SO2, NOX, VOC and 

ammonia to PM2.5, making them 

precursors to PM2.5.22 Formation of 

secondary PM2.5 may also depend on 

atmospheric conditions, including solar 

radiation, temperature, and relative 

humidity, and the interactions of 

precursors with preexisting particles 

and with cloud or fog droplets.23

The 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

contained rebuttable presumptions 

concerning the four PM2.5 precursors 

applicable to attainment plans and 

control measures related to those plans. 

See 40 CFR 51.1002(c). Although the 

rule included presumptions that states 

should address SO2 and NOX emissions 

in their attainment plans, it also 

included presumptions that regulation 

of VOCs and ammonia was not 

necessary. Specifically, in 40 CFR 

51.1002(c), the EPA provided, among 

other things, that a state was ‘‘not 

required to address VOC [and ammonia] 

as . . . PM2.5 attainment plan 

precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of 

VOC [and ammonia] emissions in the 

state for control measures,’’ unless the 

state or the EPA provided an 

appropriate technical demonstration 

showing that emissions from sources of 

these pollutants ‘‘significantly 

contribute’’ to PM2.5 concentrations in 

the nonattainment area. 40 CFR 

51.1002(c)(3), (4); see also 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586 at 

20589–97 (April 25, 2007). 

In NRDC, however, the D.C. Circuit 

remanded the EPA’s 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule in its entirety, 

including the presumptions concerning 

VOC and ammonia in 40 CFR 51.1002. 

See NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63646 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

24Section 189(e) of the CAA states that ‘‘[t]he 

control requirements applicable under plans in 

effect under this part for major stationary sources 

of PM10 shall also apply to major stationary sources 

of PM10 precursors, except where the Administrator 

determines that such sources do not contribute 

significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the 

standard in the area.’’ 

25Courts have upheld this approach to the 

requirements of subpart 4 for PM10. See, e.g., Assoc. 

of Irritated Residents v. EPA, et al., 423 F.3d 989 

(9th Cir. 2005). 

26 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, p. V–5–51 and 

Appendix V, Attachment 8, Relative Contributions 

of Precursor Emissions Reductions to Simulated 

Controlled Future-Year 24-hour PM2.5

Concentrations. 

27 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, Attachment 8, 

Relative Contributions of Precursor Emissions 

Reductions to Simulated Controlled Future-Year 24- 

hour PM2.5 Concentrations. 

28 In a separate rulemaking to approve revisions 

to SCAQMD’s nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) program, the EPA determined that the 

control requirements applicable under the 

SCAQMD SIP to major stationary sources of direct 

PM2.5 also apply to major stationary sources of NOX, 

SOX, and VOC, and that major stationary sources of 

ammonia do not contribute significantly to PM2.5

levels which exceed the PM2.5 standards in the area. 

See 80 FR 24821, May 1, 2015. This rulemaking 

addressed the control requirements of CAA section 

189(e) only for NNSR purposes and not for 

attainment planning purposes under subpart 1 and 

4 of part D, title I of the Act. 

Cir. 2013). Although the court expressly 

declined to decide the specific 

challenge to these presumptions (see 

706 F.3d at 437, n. 10 (D.C. Cir. 2013)), 

the court cited CAA section 189(e) 24 to 

support its observation that ‘‘[a]mmonia 

is a precursor to fine particulate matter, 

making it a precursor to both PM2.5 and 

PM10’’ and that ‘‘[f]or a PM10

nonattainment area governed by subpart 

4, a precursor is presumptively 

regulated.’’ 706 F.3d at 436, n. 7 (citing 

CAA section 189(e)). Consistent with 

the NRDC decision, EPA now interprets 

the Act to require that under subpart 4, 

a state must evaluate all PM2.5

precursors for regulation unless the state 

provides a demonstration adequate to 

rebut the presumption for a particular 

precursor in a particular nonattainment 

area. 

The provisions of subpart 4 do not 

define the term ‘‘precursor’’ for 

purposes of PM2.5, nor do they explicitly 

require the control of any specifically 

identified particulate matter (PM) 

precursor. The statutory definition of 

‘‘air pollutant,’’ however, provides that 

the term ‘‘includes any precursors to the 

formation of any air pollutant, to the 

extent the Administrator has identified 

such precursor or precursors for the 

particular purpose for which the term 

‘air pollutant’ is used.’’ CAA section 

302(g). The EPA has identified SO2, 

NOX, VOC, and ammonia as precursors 

to the formation of PM2.5. Accordingly, 

the attainment plan requirements of 

subpart 4 presumptively apply to 

emissions of all four precursor 

pollutants and direct PM2.5 from all 

types of stationary, area, and mobiles 

sources, except as otherwise provided in 

the Act (e.g. CAA section 189(e)). 

Section 189(e) of the Act requires that 

the control requirements for major 

stationary sources of direct PM10 also 

apply to major stationary sources of 

PM10 precursors, except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels that exceed the standard 

in the area. Section 189(e) contains the 

only express exception to the control 

requirements under subpart 4 (e.g., 

requirements for RACM and RACT, 

BACM and BACT, most stringent 

measures, and NSR) for sources of direct 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions. 

Although section 189(e) explicitly 

addresses only major stationary sources, 

the EPA interprets the Act as 

authorizing it to also determine, under 

appropriate circumstances, that 

regulation of certain PM2.5 precursors 

from other source categories in a given 

nonattainment area is not necessary. For 

example, under the EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation of the control 

requirements that apply to stationary, 

area, and mobile sources of PM10

precursors area-wide under CAA section 

172(c)(1) and subpart 4 (see General 

Preamble, 57 FR 13498 at 13539–42), a 

state may demonstrate in a SIP 

submittal that control of a certain 

precursor pollutant is not necessary in 

light of its insignificant contribution to 

ambient PM2.5 levels in the 

nonattainment area.25

We are evaluating the South Coast 

PM2.5 Plan in accordance with the 

presumption embodied within subpart 4 

that all PM2.5 precursors must be 

addressed in the state’s evaluation of 

potential control measures, unless the 

state adequately demonstrates that 

emissions of a particular precursor do 

not contribute significantly to ambient 

PM2.5 levels that exceed the PM2.5

NAAQs in the nonattainment area. 

2. Evaluation of Precursors in 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement discuss the five primary 

pollutants that contribute to the mass of 

the ambient aerosol (i.e., ammonia, NOX,

SOX, VOC, and directly emitted PM2.5), 

and states that various combinations of 

reductions in these pollutants could all 

provide a path to clean air.26 The Plan 

assesses and presents the relative value 

of each ton of precursor emission 

reductions, considering the resulting 

ambient microgram per cubic meter 

improvements in PM2.5 air quality.27 As 

presented in the weight of evidence 

discussion, trends of PM2.5 and NOX

emissions suggest a direct response 

between lower emissions of PM2.5 and 

NOX and improved air quality. The 

CMAQ simulations in the Plan provide 

a set of response factors for direct PM2.5, 

NOX, SOX and VOCs, based on 

improvements to ambient 24-hour PM2.5

levels resulting from reductions of each 

pollutant. The contribution of ammonia 

emissions is embedded as a component 

of the SOX and NOX factors since 

ammonium nitrate and ammonium 

sulfate are the resultant particulate 

species formed in the atmosphere. 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement describe how reductions in 

NOX, SO2, VOC and ammonia emissions 

contribute to attainment of the PM2.5

standard in the South Coast area and 

contain the District’s evaluation of 

available control measures for all four of 

these PM2.5 precursor pollutants, in 

addition to direct PM2.5, consistent with 

the regulatory presumptions under 

subpart 4. The 2015 Supplement also 

contains a discussion of the 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) control requirements applicable 

to major stationary sources under CAA 

section 189(e) (see 2015 Supplement at 

Attachment E), which we are not 

addressing in this proposal.28 We 

discuss the state’s evaluation of 

potential control measures for direct 

PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and ammonia in 

section IV.D of this rulemaking, 

‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Measures/Reasonably Available Control 

Technology.’’ 

D. Reasonably Available Control 

Measures/Reasonably Available Control 

Technology 

1. Requirements for RACM/RACT 

The general subpart 1 attainment plan 

requirement for RACM and RACT is 

described in CAA section 172(c)(1), 

which requires that attainment plan 

submissions ‘‘provide for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology) and shall provide 

for attainment’’ of the NAAQS. The 

attainment planning requirements 

specific to PM2.5 under subpart 4 

likewise impose upon states an 

obligation to develop attainment plans 

that require RACM on sources of direct 

PM2.5 and those PM2.5 precursors 

determined to be subject to the RACM/ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63647 

29This interpretation is consistent with guidance 

provided in the General Preamble at 13540. 

30The technical support documents for EPA’s 

rulemaking actions on these rules are available at: 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/Agency

Provision/5F5287B726E9E6F488257D790004839A/

$file/1146+and+1146+1+June+2014.pdf?Open

Element, http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/

AgencyProvision/5AD85F69581DEB9388257A

C50057D806?OpenDocument, http://yosemite.epa.

gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/F65EA6D

B0E3F7F06882579210082BE8C?OpenDocument, 

and http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/Agency

Provision/865FFD6DBAC8018F88257E82007

BA257/$file/1130+Jun+2015.pdf?OpenElement. 

RACT requirement. CAA section 

189(a)(1)(C) requires that Moderate area 

PM2.5 SIPs contain provisions to assure 

that RACM are implemented by no later 

than 4 years after designation of the 

area. The EPA reads CAA sections 

172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) together to 

require that attainment plans for 

Moderate nonattainment areas must 

provide for the implementation of 

RACM and RACT for existing sources of 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the 

nonattainment area as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than 4 years 

after designation.29 As part of the 

RACM/RACT analysis, all available 

controls should be evaluated, and 

reasonable controls should be adopted. 

The terms RACM and RACT are not 

specifically defined in the Act, nor do 

the provisions of subpart 4 specify how 

states are to meet the RACM and RACT 

requirements. In longstanding guidance, 

however, the EPA has interpreted the 

RACM requirement to include any 

potential control measure for a point, 

area, on-road and non-road emission 

source that is technologically and 

economically feasible (General Preamble 

at 13540). The EPA has historically 

defined RACT as the lowest emission 

limitation that a particular stationary 

source is capable of meeting by the 

application of control technology (e.g., 

devices, systems, process modifications, 

or other apparatus or techniques that 

reduce air pollution) that is reasonably 

available considering technological and 

economic feasibility. See General 

Preamble at 13541 and 57 FR 18070, 

18073–74 (April 28, 1992). 

An evaluation of technological 

feasibility should include consideration 

of factors such as a source’s process and 

operating conditions, raw materials, 

physical plant layout, and non-air 

quality and energy impacts (e.g., 

increased water pollution, waste 

disposal, and energy requirements) (57 

FR 18070, 18073). 

An evaluation of economic feasibility 

should include consideration of factors 

such as cost per ton of pollution 

reduced (cost-effectiveness), capital 

costs, and annualized cost (57 FR 18070, 

18074). Absent other indications, the 

EPA presumes that it is reasonable for 

similar sources to bear similar costs of 

emissions reductions. Economic 

feasibility of RACM and RACT is thus 

largely informed by evidence that other 

sources in a source category have in fact 

applied the control technology, process 

change, or measure in question in 

similar circumstances. Id. 

2. RACM/RACT Analysis in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement’s RACM/RACT evaluation 

for direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, ammonia,

and SOX sources is presented in 

Appendix VI and in Attachment D to 

the 2015 Supplement. SCAG’s RACM 

analysis for mobile sources is detailed 

in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix IV–C 

(‘‘Regional Transportation Strategies 

and Control Measures’’). CARB’s RACM 

evaluation for mobile sources is 

included in Appendix VI of the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan. 

The evaluation of potential controls is 

presented by pollutant and then by rule 

type/source category. For stationary and 

area source categories, the comparison 

to recently-issued EPA CTGs is broken 

down by the current District rule or 

rules that apply to that source category. 

See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI, and 

2015 Supplement, Attachment D. 

For the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, the District, 

CARB and SCAG each undertook a 

process to identify and evaluate 

potential measures that could contribute 

to expeditious attainment of the PM2.5

standards in the South Coast 

nonattainment area. We describe these 

processes below. 

The District conducted a multi-step 

process to identify candidate RACM 

measures for the South Coast 2012 PM2.5

Plan that are technologically and 

economically feasible. The first step was 

to conduct a 2012 Air Quality 

Technology Symposium in September 

of 2011. Technical experts from a wide 

variety of areas and the public were 

invited to provide new and innovative 

concepts to assist the South Coast area 

with attaining the PM and ozone 

NAAQS. The District also conducted 

ongoing outreach to engage stakeholders 

in the process. The following concepts 

were proposed as a result of these 

efforts: 

• Promote zero or near-zero emission 

technologies and provide incentives for 

mobile source and goods movement 

equipment upgrades, 

• further reduce VOC emissions from 

coatings, solvents, and various 

consumer products focusing on 

reformulations or alternatives to VOCbased solvents, 

• conduct a technology review for 

NOX RECLAIM, and further reduce NOX

emissions through the use of low NOX

burners, fuel cells, biogas, and 

distributed power generation, 

• address energy-climate change and 

co-benefits, the need for electricity 

storage, or new fossil-fueled peaking 

plants, to compensate for fluctuation in 

renewable energy supply, and use 

outreach to promote energy efficiency, 

influence consumer behavior, expand 

carpools, increase gas taxes, and 

promote multiagency collaboration. 

The second step in the District’s 

RACM process was to look at the EPA’s 

list of suggested control measures for 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas described in 

the 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 

The District summarized the results of 

this analysis in Table VI–3 in Appendix 

VI of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. This analysis 

shows that the District either has a preexisting rule or has developed a control 

measure for the 2012 PM2.5 Plan to 

address each of EPA’s suggested types of 

measures. 

The third step in the District’s RACM 

process involved analyzing the District’s 

rules for compliance with the RACT 

standard. The results of this analysis are 

summarized in Table VI–4, Appendix VI 

(page VI–10) of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 

District further supplemented these 

analyses in the 2015 Supplement, 

Attachment D, Tables D–4 to D–8 to 

address RACM and RACT requirements 

for direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors, 

and to provide reasoned justifications 

for control measures that were not 

adopted. A few examples of RACT-level 

rules in the South Coast include Rules 

1146 and 1146.1, which control NOX

from industrial and institutional boilers, 

Rule 1113.3, greenwaste composting, 

which in addition to providing a RACT 

level of control, also controls fugitives, 

Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning, and Rule 

1130, Graphic Arts.30

As part of these evaluations, the 

District compared its SIP rules with 

current rules, regulations and control 

measures implemented in other 

nonattainment areas. Specifically, the 

District re-evaluated all of its source 

category-specific rules and compared 

the requirements in these rules to more 

than 100 rules from four other air 

districts in California (San Joaquin 

Valley, Sacramento Metropolitan, 

Ventura, and San Francisco Bay Area), 

the Dallas-Fort Worth and HoustonGalveston areas in Texas, New York, 

and New Jersey. A summary of this 

analysis is presented in the 2012 PM2.5

Plan, Appendix VI, Table VI–5 and in 

the 2015 Supplement, Attachment D. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63648 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

31We note that 0.02 tpd is about 0.0044 percent 

of the total VOC inventory of 451 tpd for 2014. See 

section II.A of the TSD. See email correspondence 

from Joseph Cassmassi, SCAQMD, to Stanley Tong, 

US EPA Region 9, dated November 25, 2014 in the 

docket for today’s action. 32See 78 FR 2112 (January 9, 2013). 

Table VI–5 identifies those rules from 

other areas that, based on the District’s 

review, may be more stringent in some 

respects than South Coast rules. With 

respect to South Coast Rules 1115, 1130, 

and 1168, the Plan states the District’s 

intention to provide further analyses at 

a later time. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

Appendix VI, p. VI–9. Attachment D to 

the 2015 Supplement includes an 

updated RACM/RACT analysis with 

additional information on RACM for 

ammonia sources. The 2015 

Supplement also states that the District 

will further evaluate Rule 1115 and Rule 

1168, and notes that Rule 1130 was 

recently amended to address the 

applicable CTG. See 2015 Supplement, 

Attachment D, Table D–1 on p. D–5. 

According to the District, several of 

the requirements in South Coast Rule 

1115, Motor Vehicle Assembly Line 

Coating Operations, are not as stringent 

as the recommendations in the 2008 

EPA CTG for a few coating processes 

emitting >15 lbs/day. The two facilities 

subject to Rule 1115, however, have 

very small emissions, a total of about 

0.02 tpd of VOC.31 See 2015 

Supplement, Attachment D, page D–29. 

In December 2009, we approved Rule 

1168, Adhesive and Sealant 

Applications, as satisfying VOC RACT 

requirements under CAA section 

182(b)(2) (see 74 FR 67821, December 

21, 2009). In 2014, the District amended 

South Coast Rule 1130, Graphic Arts, to 

reduce fountain solution VOC content to 

16–85 g/L with optional control device 

efficiency of 90–95%, consistent with 

the EPA’s current CTG 

recommendations. On July 14, 2015, the 

EPA approved the revised South Coast 

Rule 1130 as satisfying VOC RACT 

requirements under CAA section 

182(b)(2). (See 80 FR 40915.) 

The RACM analyses and 

demonstrations conducted by CARB and 

SCAG for transportation and mobile 

source control measures are included in 

Appendix IV–C and its Attachment as 

well as the Attachment to Appendix VI 

of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. CARB has 

unique authority under the CAA to 

adopt standards for most categories of 

on- and off-road engines and vehicles, 

subject in most instances to a waiver or 

authorization by EPA under CAA 

section 209. The State of California has 

been a leader in the development of 

some of the most stringent control 

measures nationwide for on-road and 

off-road mobile sources and the fuels 

that power them. As part of its 2007 

State Strategy as revised in 2009 and 

2011 to support attainment plans in 

California for PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone, 

CARB undertook an extensive public 

consultation process to identify 

potential SIP measures. New measures 

adopted by CARB focused on cleaning 

up the in-use fleet, and increasing the 

stringency of emissions standards for a 

number of engine categories, fuels, and 

consumer products. CARB continues to 

expand its mobile source program to 

further reduce emission of direct PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors. For example, in 

January 2012, CARB adopted the 

Advanced Clean Car program.32

SCAG focused its analysis on 

transportation control measures (TCMs) 

in the 2012–2035 Regional 

Transportation Plan/Sustainable 

Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and 

the analysis and results are described in 

Appendix IV–C of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

‘‘Regional Transportation Strategy and 

Control Measures.’’ This evaluation 

considered transportation-related 

measures identified in section 108(f) of 

the CAA and measures adopted in other 

nonattainment areas of the country. 

SCAG provided a justification for 

measures that were determined to be 

infeasible for implementation in the 

South Coast nonattainment area. See 

2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix IV–C. 

The inventory for ammonia, provided 

in Appendix V of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

indicates that the largest sources of 

ammonia include fuel combustion, 

waste disposal, miscellaneous sources, 

industrial sources, livestock, 

composting, domestic pets, and on-road 

mobile emissions. See Table 2 below 

(referencing 2012 PM2.5 Plan at 

Appendix V, page V–4–2). The 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

identify five measures that control 

ammonia emissions sources in the 

South Coast. The five rules are Rule 223, 

Emissions Reduction Permits from Large 

Confined Animal Feeding Operations 

(adopted June 2, 2006); Rule 1105.1, 

Reductions of PM–10 and Ammonia 

Emissions from Fluid Catalytic Cracking 

Units (adopted November 7, 2003); Rule 

1127, Emissions Reductions from 

Livestock Waste (adopted August 6, 

2004); Rule 1133.2, Emission 

Reductions from Co-Composting 

Operations (adopted January 10, 2003); 

and Rule 1133.3, Emission Reductions 

from Greenwaste Composting 

Operations (adopted July 8, 2011). 

TABLE 2—SOUTH COAST AMMONIA

EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR 2008 

[tpd] 

Source category Ammonia 

emissions 

Livestock ................................... 18.6 

Soil ............................................ 1.8 

Domestic ................................... 25.1 

Landfill ...................................... 3.6 

Composting ............................... 17.8 

Fertilizer .................................... 1.5 

Sewage Treatment ................... 0.2 

Wood Combustion .................... 0.1 

Industrial ................................... 20.2 

On-Road Mobile ....................... 19.9 

Off-road Mobile ......................... 0.1 

Total ................................... 108.9 

Source: 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, 

Table V–4–2. 

• Rule 223, Emissions Reduction 

Permits from Large Confined Animal 

Feeding Operations (LCAF), is a work 

practice rule to control VOC and 

ammonia emissions from LCAFs. It 

requires operators and/or owners to 

implement management practices (e.g., 

feed according to National Research 

Council of the National Academy of 

Sciences guidelines, clean manure from 

corrals at least four times per year, land 

incorporate manure within 72-hours of 

removal, and allow liquid manure to 

stand in field no more than 24 hours 

after irrigation) for different components 

of the CAF operation, such as feeding, 

milking parlors, housing/bedding, 

manure management and land 

application. 

The EPA approved Rule 223 into the 

SIP on July 13, 2015 (see 80 FR 39966). 

• Rule 1105.1, Reductions of PM10

and Ammonia Emissions from Fluid 

Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCU), is 

designed to limit PM10 and ammonia 

emissions from fluid catalytic cracking 

units at oil refineries. The rule sets 

emission limits for PM10 and ammonia 

slip that result from the combination of 

FCCU emissions and ammonia injection 

used with electrostatic precipitators 

(ESP) to control FCCU emissions. Once 

in the atmosphere, ammonia emissions 

react with other compounds to produce 

secondary PM. The rule requires oil 

refineries to implement control 

technologies to meet the emissions 

limits including but not limited to dry 

and wet ESPs, sulfur oxide reducing 

agents, selective catalytic reduction, 

selective non-catalytic reduction, and 

wet gas scrubbers. The EPA approved 

this rule into the SIP on January 4, 2006 

(see 71 FR 241). 

• Rule 1127, Emissions Reductions 

from Livestock Waste, requires dairies 

(and other types of dairy-cattle 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63649 

33The EPA defines BACM as, among other things, 

the maximum degree of emissions reduction 

achievable for a source or source category, which 

is determined on a case-by-case basis considering 

energy, environmental, and economic impacts. See 

Addendum at 42010, 42014. BACM must be 

implemented for all categories of sources in a 

serious PM2.5 nonattainment area unless the State 

adequately demonstrates that a particular source 

category does not contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the PM2.5 standard. See id. At 

42011, 42012. 

34See SCAQMD Protocol, Determination of 

Particulate and Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Restaurant Operations, November 

14, 1997 (available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/R9/

R9Testmethod.nsf/0/3D4DEB4D21AB4AAF882570

AD005DFF69/$file/SC%20Rest%20emiss.pdf). 

35See SCAQMD Test Method 5.1, Determination 

of Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary 

Sources Using a Wet Impingement Train, March 

1989; SCAQMD Test Method 5.2, Determination of 

Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary 

Sources Using Heated Probe and Filter, March 

1989; and SCAQMD Test Method 5.3, 

Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions from 

Stationary Sources Using an in-Stack Filter, October 

2005. 

operations) to implement specific best 

management practices for manure 

management and disposal, and sets 

requirements for approving a facility as 

a manure processing operation. Specific 

requirements for ammonia include 

cleaning manure from corrals at least 

four times a year, disposing of manure 

only at approved manure processing 

operations, and applying it on 

agricultural land approved for that 

purpose. The EPA approved this rule 

into the SIP on May 23, 2013 (see 78 FR 

30768). 

• Rule 1133.2, Emission Reductions 

from Co-Composting Operations, 

requires all new or existing cocomposting operations to compost in an 

enclosure that meets certain technical 

requirements (e.g., inward face velocity 

of air through each opening shall be at 

least 100 feet per minute unless the 

opening contains closure seals), cure 

using an aeration system operating 

under negative pressure for no less than 

90 percent of blower operating cycle, 

and vent the exhaust to an emission 

control system with a control efficiency 

for both VOC and ammonia of at least 

80 percent, by weight, or submit a 

compliance plan for new operations that 

demonstrates an overall emission 

reduction for both VOC and ammonia of 

80 percent, by weight, based on 

emission factors specified in the rule. 

For existing operations, the required 

emission reduction is 70 percent, by 

weight, for both ammonia and VOC. 

Rule 1133.2 also specifies required 

compliance plan elements. The EPA 

approved this rule into the SIP on July 

21, 2004 (see 69 FR 43518). 

• Rule 1133.3, Emission Reductions 

from Greenwaste Composting 

Operations, requires all new or existing 

greenwaste (includes foodwaste) 

composting facilities to cover, water and 

turn active phase compost piles 

according to specific requirements (e.g., 

cover for seven days, turn only when 

top of pile is sufficiently wet, based on 

test method) to minimize VOC and 

ammonia emissions. If total foodwaste 

throughput exceeds 5,000 tons per year, 

any active pile with more than 10 

percent foodwaste must be controlled by 

a device with an overall system control 

efficiency of 80 percent, by weight, each 

for VOC and ammonia emissions. The 

EPA approved this rule into the SIP on 

November 29, 2012 (see 77 FR 71129). 

In addition, for livestock waste, the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

indicate the District will evaluate 

control measure BCM–04, Further 

Ammonia Reductions from Livestock 

Waste, as a potential ammonia control 

measure. Phase I of this control 

measure, scheduled for the 2015–2016 

timeframe, involves a technology 

assessment. The technology assessment 

will evaluate the technical and 

economic feasibility of applying sodium 

bisulfate (SBS) at local dairies in the 

South Coast. SBS application has been 

shown to be an effective method for 

reducing ammonia from fresh manure. 

(See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix IV, 

page IV–A–32). The 2015 Supplement 

states that rule development will follow 

if controls are determined to be 

technically feasible and cost-effective. 

See 2015 Supplement, page F–1 and 

Table F–1. 

We are proposing to reclassify the 

South Coast from Moderate to Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard. A final reclassification to 

Serious will trigger the requirement in 

CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) for the 

submittal of a SIP providing for the 

implementation of Best Available 

Control Measures (BACM),33 among 

other things, within 18 months. As part 

of the District’s development of a BACM 

control strategy for direct PM2.5 and 

those precursors subject to evaluation 

for potential controls in the South Coast 

(NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia), we 

encourage the District to consider 

additional measures previously 

identified by the EPA and the public in 

comments on the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 2015 

Supplement, and other individual rules 

and plans, as well as other potential 

innovative measures for reducing 

emissions. As part of this process, we 

suggest that the District consult with 

other state/local agencies and 

environmental and industry 

stakeholders. 

Condensable Fraction of Direct PM2.5

Emissions 

EPA’s 2007 PM2.5 implementation 

rule states that ‘‘[a]fter January 1, 2011, 

for purposes of establishing emissions 

limits under 51.1009 and 51.1010, 

States must establish such limits taking 

into consideration the condensable 

fraction of direct PM2.5 emissions.’’ 40 

CFR 51.1002(c). The South Coast 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement rely 

on several SIP-approved rules regulating 

direct PM emissions as part of the PM2.5

control strategy (e.g., Wood Burning 

Fireplaces (Rule 445, adopted March 7, 

2008, most recently revised May 3, 

2013), Wood Stoves and Under-Fired 

Charbroilers (Rule 1138, adopted 

November 14, 1997), and Particulate 

Matter (PM) Control Devices (Rule 1155, 

adopted December 4, 2009)). See 2015 

Supplement, Attachment F, Table F–1 

and letter dated July 25, 2014 

transmitting South Coast Rule 1155 to 

EPA. As part of our action on any rules 

that regulate direct PM2.5 emissions, we 

evaluate the emission limits in the rule 

to ensure that they appropriately 

address CPM, as required by 40 CFR 

51.1002(c). We note that the SIPapproved version of Rule 1138 requires 

testing according to the District’s 

Protocol, which requires measurement 

of both condensable and filterable PM in 

accordance with SCAQMD Test Method 

5.1. See Rule 1138 (adopted Nov. 14, 

1997, approved July 11, 2011, see 66 FR 

36170), paragraph (c)(1) and (g) and 

SCAQMD Protocol paragraph 3.1.34 We 

also note that the SIP-approved version 

of Rule 1155 requires measurement of 

both condensable and filterable PM in 

accordance with SCAQMD Test 

Methods 5.1, 5.2, or 5.3 as applicable. 

See Rule 1155 (adopted Dec. 4, 2009, 

approved March 16, 2015, see 80 FR 

13495), paragraph (e)(6).35

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

We find that the process followed in 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement to identify RACM/RACT is 

generally consistent with the EPA’s 

recommendations in the General 

Preamble. The process included 

compiling a comprehensive list of 

potential control measures for sources of 

direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, SO2, and 

ammonia in the South Coast. This list 

included measures suggested in public 

comments on the Plan. See 2012 PM2.5

Plan, Appendices VI and IV–C. As part 

of this process, the District, CARB, and 

SCAG evaluated potential controls for 

all relevant source categories for 

economic and technological feasibility, 

and provided justifications for the 

rejection of certain identified measures. 

Id. After completing this evaluation, the 

District stated its intent to analyze 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63650 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

36A full list of the District’s rules, including 

citations to our most recent action on each rule can 

be found in Appendix A to this TSD. 

37See the proposed approvals of the South Coast 

2007 [8-hour] Ozone Plan at 76 FR 57872, 57879 

(September 16, 2011) and the 2007 AQMP 

addressing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at 76 FR 41562. 

41570 (July 14, 2011). 

38The 2012 PM2.5 Plan is the latest in a series of 

air quality plans and control strategies that the 

District, CARB and SCAG have developed to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS in the South 

Coast. These plans include the 2003 PM10 Plan 

(approved 70 FR 69081 (November 14, 2005)); the 

2003 Extreme [1-hour] Ozone Attainment Plan 

(approved 74 FR 10176 (March 8, 2009); the 2007 

[8-hour] Ozone Plan (approved 77 FR 12674 (March 

1, 2012)); the 2007 State Strategy for the 1997 

Ozone and PM2.5 standards (approved 76 FR 69928 

(November 9, 2011)); the 2007 PM2.5 SIP as revised 

in 2009 and 2011 (approved 66 FR 69928 

(November 9, 2011)); and the RACT SIP submitted 

in 2007 (approved 73 FR 76947 (December 18, 

2008)). In each of our rulemakings on these Plans, 

we approved a RACM and/or RACT demonstration 

that addressed one or more PM2.5 precursors. 

39See n. 29, supra. 

40The language in sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 

172(c)(6) is quite broad, allowing a SIP to contain 

any enforceable ‘‘means or techniques’’ that EPA 

determines are ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ to meet 

CAA requirements, such that the area will attain as 

expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the 

designated date. Furthermore, the express 

allowance for ‘‘schedules and timetables’’ 

demonstrates that Congress understood that all 

required controls might not be in place when a SIP 

is approved. 

41E.g., American Lung Ass’n of N.J. v. Kean, 670 

F. Supp. 1285 (D.N.J. 1987), aff’d, 871 F.2d 319 (3rd 

Cir. 1989); NRDC, Inc. v. N.Y. State Dept. of Env. 

Cons., 668 F. Supp. 848 (S.D.N.Y. 1987); Citizens 

for a Better Env’t v. Deukmejian, 731 F. Supp. 1448, 

recon. granted in par, 746 F. Supp. 976 (N.D. Cal. 

1990); Coalition for Clean Air v. South Coast Air 

Quality Mgt. Dist., No. CV 97–6916–HLH, (C.D. Cal. 

Aug. 27, 1999). 

potential rule improvements with 

respect to rules 1115, 1130, and 1168. 

See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4 and 

Appendices VI, IV–A, and IV–C, and 

2015 Supplement, Attachment D. Since 

submittal of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan in 

February 2013, the District has 

strengthened, adopted and submitted 

Rule 1130, which EPA approved on July 

14, 2015 (see 80 FR 40915). EPA 

approved Rule 1168 as satisfying VOC 

RACT on December 21, 2009 (see 74 FR 

67821). With respect to Rule 1115, as 

noted above, the emissions inventory for 

these sources is very small. 

We have reviewed the District’s 

determination in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

and 2015 Supplement that its stationary 

and area source control measures 

represent RACM/RACT for direct PM2.5, 

NOX, VOC, ammonia and SO2. Our 

rulemaking actions on District rules 

generally provide the bases for our 

conclusions that the emission limits 

and/or other control requirements in the 

rules represent a RACT level of control, 

at minimum, for the relevant source 

categories.36 We also reviewed the 

potential additional control measures 

that the District considered, including 

those identified by public commenters 

during the State/District rulemaking 

processes, and believe that the District 

adequately justified its conclusions with 

respect to each of these measures. 

Finally, we have reviewed the 

analysis of current and potentially 

available controls for both on-road and 

off-road mobile sources in Appendices 

IV–C and VI, as well as the Attachment 

to Appendix VI. As we have noted in 

previous actions on South Coast 

plans,37 California is a leader in the 

development and implementation of 

stringent control measures for on-road 

and off-road mobile sources. Its current 

program addresses the full range of 

mobile sources in the South Coast 

through regulatory programs for both 

new and in-use vehicles and through 

incentive grant programs. See 2012 

PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III, Table III–1–3. 

The District has also adopted measures 

to reduce emissions from mobile 

sources including its Surplus Opt-in for 

NOX (SOON) rule (Rule 2449) and onroad mobile sources including its 

employer trip reduction rule (Rule 2202) 

and has a well-funded incentive grants 

program focused on mobile sources. See 

2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4. Overall, we 

believe that the State, District, and MPO 

programs provide for the 

implementation of RACM for emissions 

of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors 

from mobile sources in the South Coast. 

For the foregoing reasons, we propose 

to find that the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

2015 Supplement provide for the 

implementation of all RACM/RACT that 

can be implemented prior to the 

applicable Moderate area attainment 

date as required by CAA sections 

189(a)(1)(C) and 172(c)(1), and to 

approve the RACM/RACT 

demonstration in the South Coast 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement.38

E. Major Stationary Source Control 

Requirements Under CAA Section 

189(e) 

CAA section 189(e) specifically 

requires that the control requirements 

applicable to major stationary sources of 

direct PM2.5 also apply to major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, 

except where the Administrator 

determines that such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels 

that exceed the standard in the area (see 

General Preamble at 13539 and 13541 to 

42). The control requirements 

applicable to major stationary sources of 

direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in a 

Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area 

include, at minimum, the requirements 

of a nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) permit program meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5) 

(see CAA 189(a)(1)(A)). 

In a separate rulemaking to approve 

revisions to SCAQMD’s NNSR permit 

program, the EPA evaluated the 

District’s discussion of control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources (Attachment E of the 

2015 Supplement) and determined that 

the District’s SIP-approved NNSR 

program satisfies the requirements of 

CAA section 189(e) for direct PM2.5 and 

all PM2.5 precursors.39 Accordingly, in 

this action, the EPA is not addressing 

the NNSR control requirements that 

apply to major stationary sources of 

direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the 

South Coast area under CAA section 

189(e). 

F. Adopted Control Strategy 

1. Requirements for Control Strategies 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) provides 

that each SIP ‘‘shall include enforceable 

emission limitations and other control 

measures, means or techniques . . . as 

well as schedules and timetables for 

compliance, as may be necessary or 

appropriate to meet the applicable 

requirement of the Act.’’ Section 

172(c)(6) of the Act, which applies to 

nonattainment area SIPs, is virtually 

identical to section 110(a)(2)(A).40

Measures necessary to meet RACM/

RACT and the additional control 

requirements under section 172(c)(6) 

must be adopted by the State in an 

enforceable form (General Preamble at 

13541) and submitted to the EPA for 

approval into the SIP under CAA 

section 110. 

Commitments approved by the EPA 

under CAA section 110(k)(3) are 

enforceable by the EPA and citizens 

under CAA sections 113 and 304, 

respectively. In the past, the EPA has 

approved enforceable commitments and 

courts have enforced actions against 

states that failed to comply with them.41

Additionally, if a state fails to meet its 

commitments, the EPA may make a 

finding of failure to implement the SIP 

under CAA section 179(a)(4), which 

starts an 18-month period for the state 

to correct the non-implementation 

before mandatory sanctions are 

imposed. 

Once the EPA determines that 

circumstances warrant use of an 

enforceable commitment, the EPA 

considers three factors in determining 

whether to approve the use of an 

enforceable commitment to meet a CAA 

requirement: (a) Does the commitment 

address a limited portion of the CAArequired program; (b) is the state 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63651 

42The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 

upheld the EPA’s interpretation of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) and the Agency’s use and 

application of the three factor test in approving 

enforceable commitments in the Houston-Galveston 

ozone SIP in BCCA Appeal Group et al. v. EPA et 

al., 355 F.3d 817 (5th Cir. 2003). 

43These measures are typically rules that have 

compliance dates that occur after the adoption date 

of a plan and mobile source measures that achieve 

reductions as older engines are replaced through 

attrition (e.g., through fleet turnover). 

44Approved on September 26, 2013, see 78 FR 

59249. 

45 Ibid. 

46These federal measures include EPA’s national 

emissions standards for heavy duty diesel trucks 

(66 FR 5001 (January 18, 2001)), certain new 

construction and farm equipment (Tier 2 and 3 nonroad engines standards, 63 FR 56968 (October 23, 

1998) and Tier 4 diesel non-road engine standards, 

69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004)), and locomotives (63 

FR 18978 (April 16, 1998) and 73 FR 37045 (June 

30, 2008)). States are allowed to rely on reductions 

from federal measures in attainment and RFP 

demonstrations and for other SIP purposes. 

capable of fulfilling its commitment; 

and (c) is the commitment for a 

reasonable and appropriate period of 

time.42

2. Control Strategy in the 2012 PM2.5

Plan and 2015 Supplement 

For purposes of evaluating the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement, we 

have divided the measures relied on to 

satisfy the applicable control 

requirements into two categories: 

Baseline measures and control strategy 

measures. 

As the term is used here, baseline 

measures are federal, State, and District 

rules and regulations adopted prior to 

June of 2012 for District rules, and prior 

to August of 2011 for CARB rules (i.e., 

prior to the development of 2012 PM2.5

Plan) that continue to achieve emissions 

reductions through the current 

attainment year of 2015 and beyond.43

The Plan describes many of these 

measures in Chapter 4 and in 

Appendices III, IV–B, IV–C and VI. 

Reductions from these baseline 

measures are incorporated into the 

baseline inventory and reductions from 

the District measures in the plan are 

individually quantified in Appendix III, 

Table III–2–2B. According to the Plan, 

these measures provide most of the 

emissions reductions projected to occur 

between the base year of 2008 and the 

Moderate area attainment date of 2015. 

See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4, and 

Appendix V, and 2015 Supplement 

Attachment A; see also Appendix A of 

the TSD. 

Control strategy measures are the new 

rules, rule revisions, commitments, and 

other measures that provide the 

additional increment of emissions 

reductions needed beyond the baseline 

measures to provide for attainment 

(when applicable), to demonstrate RFP, 

to meet the RACM/RACT requirement, 

or to provide for contingency measures. 

The District included several new 

measures in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

2015 Supplement to provide for 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

First, the District committed to adopt, 

submit, and implement amendments to 

two District rules (Rule 444 and Rule 

445) to reduce direct PM2.5 emissions 

from open burning and residential wood 

burning activities. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 

p. 4–8, Table 4–2 and SCAQMD 

Governing Board Resolution 12–19 (Dec. 

7, 2012), p. 8, as revised by 2015 

Supplement, Attachment F, Table F–1 

and SCAQMD Governing Board 

Resolution 15–2 (Feb. 19, 2015). 

Second, the District committed to 

achieve 11.7 tpd of direct PM2.5

emission reductions by 2015, either 

from these two amended rules or from 

substitute measures as necessary to 

address any shortfall in emission 

reductions. Id. Third, the District 

committed to carry out technology 

assessments to address emissions from 

under-fired charbroilers and livestock 

waste in 2015–2016 and 2017, 

respectively. Id. Finally, the District 

committed to adopt revisions to its NOX

RECLAIM program to achieve an 

additional 2 tpd of NOX emission 

reductions in 2015, as a contingency 

measure, and to adopt backstop 

measures related to ports and portrelated facilities in 2015. Id. Following 

the State’s submittal of the 2012 PM2.5

Plan to the EPA in 2013, the District 

adopted amendments to Rule 444 and 

Rule 445 and on June 11, 2013, the 

District submitted these revised rules to 

the EPA for SIP approval, consistent 

with its commitments in the Plan. These 

measures and commitments are listed in 

Table 3 below. 

TABLE 3—SCAQMD 2012 PM2.5 PLAN AND 2015 SUPPLEMENT SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS

Rule No. Measure number and description Adoption date Implementation 

date 

Emission 

reductions 

444 ............. Further Reductions from Open Burning 44 ............................. 2013 ..................................... 2013 4.6 tpd PM2.5

445 ............. Further Reductions from Residential Wood Burning 45 ......... 2013 ..................................... 2013 7.1 tpd PM2.5

1138 ........... Emissions Reductions from Under-fired Charbroilers ........... 2017 ..................................... N/A TBD 

1127 ........... Further Ammonia Emissions From Livestock Waste ............ 2015–2016 Technology Assessment.N/A TBD 

2002 ........... Further NOX Reductions from RECLAIM .............................. 2015 ..................................... N/A 2 tpd NOX

4001 ........... Backstop Measures for Indirect Sources of Emissions from 

Ports and Port-related Facilities.

2015 ..................................... N/A N/A 

Source: 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4, Table 4–2, as amended by 2015 Supplement, Attachment F, Table F–1. 

3. Evaluation and Conclusions 

The Plan provides for the majority of 

the emissions reductions necessary for 

attainment to be achieved from baseline 

measures. These reductions come from 

a combination of District, State and 

federal stationary and mobile source 

measures.46 Over the past four decades, 

the District has adopted or revised 

almost 100 prohibitory rules that limit 

emissions of NOX, SO2, ammonia, VOC, 

and particulate matter from stationary 

sources. See Appendix A of this TSD. 

The vast majority of these rules are 

currently SIP-approved and as such, 

their emissions reductions are fully 

creditable in attainment-related SIPs. 

The District’s most recent amendments 

to Rule 444 and Rule 445 further tighten 

the District’s control strategy for direct 

PM2.5 emissions. California has also 

adopted standards for many categories 

of on- and off-road vehicles and engines 

as well as standards for gasoline and 

diesel fuels. 

The State’s mobile source measures 

fall into two categories: Measures for 

which the State has obtained or has 

applied to obtain a waiver of federal 

pre-emption under CAA section 209 

(‘‘section 209 waiver measures’’ or 

‘‘waiver measures’’) and those for which 

the State is not required to obtain a 

waiver (‘‘non-waiver measures’’ or ‘‘SIP 

measures’’). 

Under the CAA, the EPA is charged 

with establishing national emission 

limits for mobile sources. States are 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63652 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

47See Committee for a Better Arvin v. EPA, 786 

F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2015). 

48See letter dated August 14, 2015, from Richard 

W. Corey, Executive Officer, California Air 

Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9. 

49See ‘‘Rule Evaluation Form,’’ South Coast Rules 

444 and 445, and South Coast Air Quality 

Management District, Draft Final Staff Report, 

Proposed Amended Rule 445—Wood-Burning 

Devices, Proposed Amended Rule 444—Open 

Burning, May 2013, pp. 15–16. 

50See letter dated June 11, 2013, from Edie 

Chang, Deputy Executive Officer, California Air 

Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9, transmitting South 

Coast Rules 444 and 445. 

51For more information on the CAA’s air quality 

modeling requirements, please see section II.B of 

the TSD. 

generally preempted from establishing 

such limits except for California, which 

can establish these limits subject to EPA 

waiver or authorization under CAA 

section 209 (referred to herein as 

‘‘waiver measures’’). Over the years, the 

EPA has issued waivers or 

authorizations for many mobile source 

regulations adopted by CARB. California 

attainment and maintenance plans rely 

on emissions reductions from 

implementation of the waiver measures 

through use of emissions models such 

as EMFAC, and the South Coast 2012 

PM2.5 Plan is no exception. 

Historically, the EPA has allowed 

California to take credit for such 

‘‘waiver’’ measures even though the 

waiver measures themselves (i.e., 

CARB’s regulations) have not been 

adopted and approved as part of the 

California SIP. However, a recent 

decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals held that EPA’s longstanding 

practice in this regard was at odds with 

the CAA requirement that state and 

local emissions limits relied upon to 

meet the NAAQS be enforceable by the 

EPA or private citizens through 

adoption and approval of such limits in 

the SIP.47

In response to the court’s decision, 

CARB has adopted the necessary waiver 

measures as revisions to the California 

SIP and submitted them to EPA for 

approval.48 EPA intends to propose 

action on these waiver measures in a 

separate rulemaking. Once approved as 

part of the SIP, the measures will be 

enforceable by the EPA or private 

citizens under the CAA. In today’s 

action, the EPA is proposing to approve 

certain elements of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

and 2015 Supplement in part based on 

our expectation that these waiver 

measures will soon become federally 

enforceable as a result of our approval 

of the measures as part of the SIP. 

Non-waiver measures include 

improvements to California’s inspection 

and maintenance (I/M) program, 

SmogCheck, and cleaner burning 

gasoline and diesel regulations as well 

as the District’s stationary source and 

mobile source rules. See TSD at 

Appendix A for a list of District rules 

and EPA actions on them. 

As discussed above, we generally 

consider three factors in determining 

whether to approve the use of 

enforceable commitments to meet a 

CAA requirement. In this case, however, 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement do not rely on either the 

rule amendment commitments or the 

emission reduction commitments in its 

impracticability demonstration, RACM 

demonstration, RFP demonstration, or 

quantitative milestones, or to meet any 

other CAA requirement. Therefore, we 

do not need to apply this three-factor 

test before proposing to approve the 

District’s commitments into the SIP. 

Approval of these commitments will 

strengthen the SIP and contribute to the 

SIP’s purpose of ‘‘eliminating or 

reducing the severity and number of 

violations of the [PM2.5 NAAQS] and 

achieving expeditious attainment of 

such standards.’’ See CAA 176(c)(1)(A). 

We are proposing to approve the 

District’s commitments to adopt and 

implement specific control measures 

identified in Table 4–2 in the South 

Coast 2012 AQMP (as amended March 

4, 2015 by Table F–1 in Attachment F 

of the 2015 Supplement) and to achieve 

specified NOX emission reductions, to 

the extent that these commitments have 

not yet been fulfilled. Specifically, we 

are proposing to approve the District’s 

commitments to: (1) Carry out a 

technology assessment to address 

emissions from under-fired charbroilers 

by 2017, (2) conduct a technology 

assessment for livestock waste by 2016, 

(3) adopt revisions to its NOX RECLAIM 

program or other enforceable control 

measures to achieve an additional 2 tpd 

of NOX emission reductions in 2015, 

and (4) adopt backstop measures for 

indirect sources of emissions from ports 

and port-related facilities. See 2012 

PM2.5 Plan, p. 4–8, Table 4–2 and 

SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 

12–19 (Dec. 7, 2012), pp. 7–8, as revised 

by 2015 Supplement, Attachment F, 

Table F–1 and SCAQMD Governing 

Board Resolution 15–2 (Feb. 19, 2015), 

pp. 2–3. 

With respect to the commitments to 

adopt Rules 444 and 445 and to achieve 

11.7 tpd of direct PM2.5 emission 

reductions, the District has satisfied 

these commitments by submitting the 

fully adopted rules to EPA on June 11, 

2013, together with technical 

documentation to support its conclusion 

that these rules will achieve 11.7 tpd of 

direct PM2.5 emission reductions in 

2015.49 The EPA approved Rule 444 and 

Rule 445 on September 26, 2013 (see 79 

FR 59249).50

G. Demonstration That Attainment by 

the Moderate Area Attainment Date is 

Impracticable 

1. Requirements for Attainment/

Impracticability of Attainment 

Demonstrations 

CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requires that 

each Moderate area attainment plan 

include a demonstration that the plan 

provides for attainment by the latest 

applicable Moderate area deadline or, 

alternatively, that attainment by the 

latest applicable attainment date is 

impracticable. A demonstration that the 

plan provides for attainment must be 

based on air quality modeling, and the 

EPA generally recommends that a 

demonstration of impracticability also 

be based on air quality modeling 

consistent with EPA’s modeling 

guidance (General Preamble at 13538).51

CAA section 188(c) states, in relevant 

part, that the Moderate area attainment 

date ‘‘shall be as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than the end of 

the sixth calendar year after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment. . . .’’ 

For the South Coast area, which was 

initially designated as nonattainment for 

the 2006 PM2.5 standard effective 

December 14, 2009, the applicable 

Moderate area attainment date under 

section 188(c) is as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than December 

31, 2015. 

In SIP submissions to demonstrate 

impracticability, the State should 

document that its required control 

strategy in the attainment plan 

represents the application of RACM/

RACT to existing sources. The EPA 

believes it is appropriate to require 

adoption of all available control 

measures that are reasonable (i.e., 

technologically and economically 

feasible) in areas that do not 

demonstrate timely attainment, even 

where those measures cannot be 

implemented within the 4-year 

timeframe for implementation of RACM 

under CAA section 189(a)(1)(C). The 

impracticability demonstration will 

then be based on a showing that the area 

cannot attain by the applicable 

attainment date, notwithstanding 

implementation of the required controls. 

2. Impracticability Demonstration for 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement 

By letter dated July 28, 2015, the 

District requested that the EPA 

reclassify the South Coast Air Basin to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63653 

52See letter dated July 28, 2015, from Barry R. 

Wallerstein, Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to 

Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, US 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. 

53See Memorandum dated August 21, 2015 from 

Michael Flagg, U.S. EPA, Region 9 Air Quality 

Analysis Office, to South Coast Docket EPA–R09– 

OAR–2015–0204, Subject: Practicability of South 

Coast 2015 Attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM 

NAAQS (‘‘Flagg Memo’’). 

54Some data in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarter of 

2014 may have been impacted by a temporary lab 

closure and other issues at SCAQMD and are under 

current review. As a precautionary measure, we 

conducted an additional analysis on the 

impracticability of attaining by December 31, 2015 

that completely excluded these data. The outcome 

of the analysis further supported the 

impracticability of attainment by the applicable 

attainment date. See Attachment to Flagg Memo, 

under ‘‘24-hour practicability’’ tab. 

55EPA also assumed that the sampling rate 

observed so far would continue throughout the 

year; this yielded an estimate of the number of total 

samples expected for 2015, and allowed for 

selection of the corresponding rank of the daily data 

available to use as the 98th percentile in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.5. 

‘‘Serious’’ for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The letter provided preliminary 2015 air 

quality monitoring data for the Mira 

Loma monitoring station supporting a 

conclusion that attainment of the 2006 

PM2.5 standard by December 31, 2015 in 

the South Coast is impracticable.52

Based in part on the information 

contained in this letter and in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and Supplement, we have 

conducted an analysis of recent PM2.5

monitoring data for the South Coast 

PM2.5 nonattainment area.53 For this 

analysis, the EPA used certified data for 

2013, 2014 and preliminary data 

available for 2015.54 Although the State 

and District originally intended for the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

to demonstrate that the area would 

attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the 

Moderate area attainment date of 

December 31, 2015, more recent 

monitoring data show that 24-hour 

PM2.5 levels in the South Coast, with a 

current design value (2012–2014) of 38 

mg/m3 at the Mira Loma monitoring site, 

continue to be above the 35 mg/m3 level 

of the 2006 PM2.5 standard, and the 

recent trends in the South Coast’s 24- 

hour PM2.5 levels are not consistent with 

a projection of attainment by the end of 

2015. 

The EPA calculated the maximum 

allowed 2015 concentrations for all 

monitors in the area, and compared 

them to the estimated 2015 98th 

percentile. If the estimated 2015 98th 

percentile was greater than the 

maximum allowed 2015 98th percentile 

concentration, the EPA considered 

attainment at that monitoring site 

impracticable. For each monitor, the 

EPA estimated the 2015 98th percentile 

from the 2015 data available in AQS as 

of August 2015, based a number of 

assumptions.55 The EPA assumed that 

the concentrations measured during the 

remainder of 2015 would be no higher 

than those already recorded, so the 98th 

percentile could be chosen from among 

the already recorded data. This is a 

conservative assumption for assessing 

the impracticability of attainment, since 

future concentrations and 98th 

percentiles could be higher than 

recorded values. 

The EPA’s analysis showed that 

during 2015, two monitoring sites 

(Rubidoux and Mira Loma-Van Buren) 

had estimated 98th percentiles greater 

than the maximum allowed 98th 

percentile concentration for 2015, 

which indicates that attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the end 

of 2015 is impracticable. 

In a separate analysis, EPA assumed 

that Rubidoux and Mira Loma-Van 

Buren collected a minimum of 351 daily 

samples (i.e. consistent with an 

everyday sampling frequency) in 2015, 

which would allow for selection of the 

8th highest recorded value as the 98th 

percentile for 2015. This assumption 

resulted in selection of the lowest 98th 

percentile value possible for 2015, 

making the analysis more conservative 

than the previous approach. Even under 

this assumption, both Rubidoux and 

Mira Loma-Van Buren had estimated 

2015 98th percentiles greater than the 

maximum allowed 2015 98th percentile. 

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

Our conservative assessment of recent 

PM2.5 air quality data indicates that 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard in 

the South Coast by December 31, 2015 

is impracticable. We have also evaluated 

the RACM/RACT demonstration in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

and find that it provides for the 

expeditious implementation of all 

RACM that may feasibly be 

implemented at this time, consistent 

with the requirements of CAA sections 

172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast. See 

section II.D of this TSD. Implementation 

of this RACM/RACT control strategy 

appears, however, to be insufficient to 

bring the South Coast area into 

attainment by December 31, 2015. 

Based on this evaluation, we propose 

to approve the State’s demonstration in 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement that attainment of the 2006 

PM2.5 standard by the Moderate area 

attainment date in the South Coast is 

impracticable, consistent with the 

requirements of CAA section 

189(a)(1)(B)(ii). Based on this proposal, 

we propose to reclassify the South Coast 

as Serious nonattainment, which would 

trigger requirements for the State to 

submit a Serious area plan consistent 

with the requirements of subparts 1 and 

4 of part D, Title I of the Act (see Section 

III of this TSD). 

H. Reasonable Further Progress and 

Quantitative Milestones 

1. Requirements for Reasonable Further 

Progress and Quantitative Milestones 

CAA section 172(c)(2) requires 

nonattainment area plans to provide for 

reasonable further progress (RFP). In 

addition, CAA section 189(c) requires 

PM2.5 nonattainment area SIPs to 

include quantitative milestones to be 

achieved every 3 years until the area is 

redesignated to attainment and which 

demonstrate reasonable further progress 

(RFP), as defined in CAA section 171(1). 

Section 171(1) defines RFP as ‘‘such 

annual incremental reductions in 

emissions of the relevant air pollutant as 

are required by [Part D] or may 

reasonably be required by the 

Administrator for the purpose of 

ensuring attainment of the applicable 

[NAAQS] by the applicable date.’’ 

Neither subpart 1 nor subpart 4 of part 

D, title I of the Act requires that a set 

percentage of emissions reductions be 

achieved in any given year for purposes 

of satisfying the RFP requirement. 

RFP has historically been met by 

showing annual incremental emission 

reductions sufficient generally to 

maintain at least linear progress toward 

attainment by the applicable deadline 

(Addendum at 42015). As discussed in 

the Addendum, requiring linear 

progress in reductions of direct PM2.5

and any individual precursor in a PM2.5

plan may be appropriate in situations 

where: 

• The pollutant is emitted by a large 

number and range of sources, 

• the relationship between any 

individual source or source category 

and overall air quality is not well 

known, 

• a chemical transformation is 

involved (e.g., secondary particulate 

significantly contributes to PM2.5 levels 

over the standard), and/or 

• the emission reductions necessary 

to attain the PM2.5 standard are 

inventory-wide. Id. 

The EPA’s guidance in the Addendum 

at 42015 recommends that requiring 

linear progress is less appropriate in 

other situations, such as: 

• Where there are a limited number of 

sources of direct PM2.5 or a precursor, 

• where the relationships between 

individual sources and air quality are 

relatively well defined, and/or 

• where the emission control systems 

utilized (e.g., at major point sources) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63654 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

56Section 172(a)(2)(A) of the CAA states, in 

relevant part, that the attainment date for a 

nonattainment area ‘‘shall be the date by which 

attainment can be achieved as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than 5 years from the date 

such area was designated nonattainment under 

section [107(d)].’’ Because the EPA designated 

South Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour 

standard effective December 14, 2009 (74 FR 58688, 

November 13, 2009), under subpart 1 the area was 

required to attain this standard no later than 

December 14, 2014. 

57See 2012 PM2.5 plan at Chapter 4, pp. 4–4 

through 4–13, Table 4–7, and Appendix III, Table 

III–2–2B (‘‘Emission Reductions (Tons per Day) in 

the Baseline by District Rules’’). 

58Subpart 4 requires states to submit attainment 

plans within 18 months after nonattainment 

designations (CAA 189(a)(2)). Due to unusual 

circumstances, however, the EPA has by rule 

created a later deadline for submittal of attainment 

plan submission date for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

order to provide states a reasonable amount of time 

to address the requirements of subpart 4 consistent 

with the NRDC decision. See 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 

2014). 

will result in swift and dramatic 

emission reductions. Id. 

In nonattainment areas characterized 

by any of these latter conditions, RFP 

may be better represented as step-wise 

progress as controls are implemented 

and achieve significant reductions soon 

thereafter. For example, if an area’s 

nonattainment problem can be 

attributed to a few major sources, EPA 

guidance indicates that ‘‘RFP should be 

met by ‘adherence to an ambitious 

compliance schedule’ which is likely to 

periodically yield significant emission 

reductions of direct PM2.5 or a PM2.5

precursor’’ (Addendum at 42015). 

Plans for PM2.5 nonattainment areas 

should include detailed schedules for 

compliance with emission regulations 

in the area and provide corresponding 

annual emission reductions to be 

realized from each milestone in the 

schedule (Addendum at 42016). In 

reviewing an attainment plan under 

subpart 4, EPA evaluates whether the 

annual incremental emission reductions 

to be achieved are reasonable in light of 

the statutory objective of timely 

attainment. 

Section 189(c) provides that the 

quantitative milestones submitted by a 

state for an area also must be consistent 

with RFP for the area. Thus, the EPA 

determines an area’s compliance with 

RFP in conjunction with determining its 

compliance with the quantitative 

milestone requirement. Because RFP is 

an annual emission reduction 

requirement and the quantitative 

milestones are to be achieved every 3 

years, when a state demonstrates an 

area’s compliance with the quantitative 

milestone requirement, it will 

demonstrate that RFP has been achieved 

during each of the relevant 3 years. 

Quantitative milestones should consist 

of elements that allow progress to be 

quantified or measured. Specifically, 

states should identify and submit 

quantitative milestones providing for 

the amount of emission reductions 

adequate to achieve the NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date (Addendum 

at 42016). Implementation of control 

measures comprising the RFP plan may 

provide a means for satisfying the 

quantitative milestone requirement (see 

id.). The Act requires states to include 

RFP and quantitative milestones even 

for areas that cannot practicably attain. 

2. RFP Demonstration and Quantitative 

Milestones in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

2015 Supplement 

South Coast’s 2012 PM2.5 Plan was 

originally developed in accordance with 

the requirements of subpart 1 and the 

2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule (see 75 

FR 20586, April 25, 2007), which did 

not require a submittal of a separate RFP 

plan where the State submits a plan 

demonstrating attainment within five 

years of the date of designation (see 40 

CFR 51.1009(b)). Because the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan as originally adopted (in 

December 2012) included the State’s 

demonstration of attainment by 

December 14, 2014, which is five years 

from the date of designation,56 the Plan 

does not include a separate RFP 

demonstration. 

Following the D.C. Circuit’s January 

2013 decision remanding the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule (see NRDC v. EPA, 

706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013)) and the 

EPA’s June 2014 promulgation of 

Moderate area classifications in the 

deadline and classifications rule (see 79 

FR 31566, June 2, 2014), the District 

developed the 2015 Supplement to 

address the applicable subpart 4 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. By the time the State and 

District submitted this Supplement to 

EPA in early 2015, less than a year 

remained before the December 31, 2015 

Moderate area attainment date 

applicable to the area under subpart 4, 

and ambient air quality monitoring data 

indicated the area was very close to 

attaining the 2006 PM2.5 standard. See 

2015 Supplement, p. 4. Accordingly, the 

2015 Supplement does not contain a 

separate RFP or quantitative milestone 

demonstration. 

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

As a result of the NRDC decision 

remanding the 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule, the EPA has 

considered whether the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

and 2015 Supplement meet the RFP 

requirement in section 172(c)(2) of the 

Act and proposes to find that they do. 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan demonstrates 

that all RACM/RACT are being 

implemented as expeditiously as 

practicable and identifies projected 

emission levels for 2014 that reflect full 

implementation of the State’s and 

District’s RACM/RACT control strategy 

for the area.57 The Plan also shows 

steady reductions in direct PM2.5, NOX, 

VOC, SOX, and ammonia emissions 

during the 2008–2014 period. Figures 

IIH–1 and IIH–2 show the emissions 

trajectories for direct PM2.5 and each 

PM2.5 precursor addressed in the control 

strategy which indicate generally linear 

reductions. We propose, therefore, to 

approve the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement as satisfying the 

requirement for RFP in CAA section 

172(c)(2) for the 2006 PM2.5 standard. 

With respect to quantitative 

milestones, the EPA is proposing to 

establish December 31, 2014 as the 

starting point for the first 3-year period 

under CAA section 189(e) for the 2006 

PM2.5 standard in the South Coast. This 

date is the due date for the State’s 

submittal of attainment-related SIPs 

necessary to satisfy the Moderate area 

requirements applicable to the South 

Coast area.58 Accordingly, the first 

quantitative milestone date for the 

South Coast area would be December 

31, 2017 (3 years after December 31, 

2014). Because this date falls well after 

the applicable Moderate area attainment 

date for the area, which is December 31, 

2015, we propose to find that 

quantitative milestones are not 

necessary in this particular Moderate 

area plan. If, however, EPA either 

finalizes this proposal to reclassify the 

South Coast area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard or determines that the area has 

failed to attain by the December 31, 

2015 attainment date, the State and 

District will be required to submit a 

Serious area plan that contains, among 

other things, quantitative milestones 

that demonstrate RFP at each milestone 

date, starting December 31, 2017 and at 

subsequent 3-year intervals until the 

area is redesignated to attainment. 

I. Contingency Measures 

1. Requirements for Contingency 

Measures 

Under CAA section 172(c)(9), PM2.5

plans must include contingency 

measures to be implemented if an area 

fails to meet RFP (‘‘RFP contingency 

measures’’) and, where the SIP includes 

a demonstration of attainment (as 

opposed to a demonstration of 

impracticability), contingency measures 

to be implemented if an area fails to 

attain the PM2.5 standards by the 

applicable attainment date (‘‘attainment 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63655 

59The EPA does not interpret the requirement for 

failure-to-attain contingency measures to apply to 

Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas that cannot 

practicably attain the NAAQS by the statutory 

attainment date. Rather, the EPA believes it is 

appropriate for the state to identify and adopt 

attainment contingency measures as part of the 

Serious area attainment plan that it will develop 

once the EPA reclassifies the area (Addendum at 

42015). 

contingency measures’’). Under subpart 

4, however, the EPA interprets section 

172(c)(9) in light of the specific 

requirements for particulate matter 

nonattainment areas. Section 

189(b)(1)(A) differentiates between 

attainment plans that provide for timely 

attainment and those that demonstrate 

that attainment is impracticable. Where 

a SIP includes a demonstration that 

attainment by the applicable attainment 

date is impracticable, the state need 

only submit contingency measures to be 

implemented if an area fails to meet 

RFP.59

The purpose of contingency measures 

is to continue progress in reducing 

emissions while the SIP is being revised 

to meet the missed RFP milestone or to 

provide for attainment. 

The principal requirements for 

contingency measures are: 

• Contingency measures must be fully 

adopted rules or control measures that 

are ready to be implemented quickly 

upon failure to meet RFP or failure of 

the area to meet the standard by its 

attainment date. 

• The SIP should contain trigger 

mechanisms for the contingency 

measures, specify a schedule for 

implementation, and indicate that the 

measures will be implemented without 

further action by the state or by the EPA. 

In general, we expect all actions needed 

to effect full implementation of the 

measures to occur within 60 days after 

the EPA notifies the state of a failure. 

• The contingency measures should 

consist of control measures for the area 

that are not relied on to demonstrate 

attainment or RFP. 

• The measures should provide for 

emissions reductions equivalent to 

approximately one year of reductions 

needed for RFP calculated as the overall 

level of reductions needed to 

demonstrate attainment divided by the 

number of years from the base year to 

the attainment year. (General Preamble 

at 13543 and Addendum at 42014). 

2. Contingency Measures in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

Contingency measures for failure to 

attain are described in Chapter 6, pages 

6–7 to 6–13 of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

do not include contingency measures 

for failure to meet RFP. 

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

Because we are proposing to approve 

the State’s demonstration that 

attainment by the applicable Moderate 

area attainment date of December 31, 

2015 is impracticable in the South Coast 

and to reclassify the area to serious, 

contingency measures for failure to 

attain are not required as part of this 

Moderate area plan. Upon 

reclassification of the South Coast area 

as a Serious area, California will be 

required to adopt attainment 

contingency measures as part of the 

Serious area attainment plan for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

We propose to find that the RFP 

contingency measure requirement for 

any RFP milestone year prior to 2014 is 

now moot as applied to the South Coast 

PM2.5 nonattainment area. The sole 

purpose of RFP contingency measures is 

to provide continued progress if an area 

fails to meet its RFP goal. Failure to 

meet any milestone year target prior to 

2014 would have required California to 

implement RFP contingency measures 

in the South Coast and to revise the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan to assure that it still 

provided for attainment by the 

applicable attainment date of December 

31, 2015. In this case, however, the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

demonstrate that actual emission levels 

in the years leading up to 2014 were 

consistent with RFP for direct PM2.5 and 

all four precursor pollutants (NOX, SOX, 

VOC and ammonia) regulated in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan. Accordingly, RFP 

contingency measures no longer have 

meaning or purpose, and therefore EPA 

proposes to find that the requirement for 

them is now moot. 

J. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets 

CAA section 176(c) requires Federal 

actions in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to conform to the 

SIP’s goals of eliminating or reducing 

the severity and number of violations of 

the NAAQS and achieving expeditious 

attainment of the standards. Conformity 

to the SIP’s goals means that such 

actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute 

to violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen 

the severity of an existing violation, or 

(3) delay timely attainment of any 

NAAQS or any interim milestone. 

Actions involving Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding 

or approval are subject to the EPA’s 

transportation conformity rule, codified 

at 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Under this 

rule, MPOs in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas coordinate with state 

and local air quality and transportation 

agencies, the EPA, FHWA, and FTA to 

demonstrate that an area’s RTP and 

transportation improvement program 

(TIP) conform to the applicable SIP. 

This demonstration is typically done by 

showing that estimated emissions from 

existing and planned highway and 

transit systems are less than or equal to 

the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(budgets) contained in all control 

strategy SIPs. An attainment, 

maintenance, or RFP SIP should include 

budgets for the attainment year, each 

required RFP year, or the last year of the 

maintenance plan, as appropriate. 

Budgets are generally established for 

specific years and specific pollutants or 

precursors and must reflect all of the 

motor vehicle control measures 

contained in the attainment and RFP 

demonstrations (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v)). 

PM2.5 plans should identify motor 

vehicle emission budgets for direct 

PM2.5 and all significant PM2.5

precursors for each RFP milestone year 

and the attainment year, if the plan 

demonstrates attainment. All direct 

PM2.5 SIP budgets should include direct 

PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions from 

tailpipe, brake wear, and tire wear. A 

state must also consider whether reentrained paved and unpaved road dust 

or highway and transit construction 

dust are significant contributors and 

should be included in the direct PM2.5

budget. See 40 CFR 93.102(b) and 

93.122(f) and the conformity rule 

preamble at 69 FR 40004, 40031–40036 

(July 1, 2004). 

2. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in 

the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 

Supplement 

The 2015 Supplement revised the 

attainment demonstration in the 2012 

PM2.5 Plan to identify December 31, 

2015 as the applicable attainment date, 

and included revised budgets for 2015 

for directly emitted PM2.5, NOX, and 

VOC. See 2015 Supplement, Attachment 

C, Table C–1. These budgets reflect 

average annual daily emissions and are 

calculated using EMFAC2011, the 

currently approved mobile source 

emission model for California, and 

transportation activity from SCAG’s 

adopted 2012 Regional Transportation 

Plan (RTP), consistent with the 

methodology for developing the 

emissions inventories used in the 

attainment demonstration. Reductions 

from incentive measures were removed 

from the budgets, and off-model 

reductions for reformulated gasoline 

(RFG) and SmogCheck (California’s 

inspection and maintenance program) 

which were not in EMFAC2011 were 

included in the budgets, consistent with 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63656 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

60 In 2012, the EPA revised the annual PM2.5

standard, lowering its level from 15 mg/m3 to 12 mg/ 

m3 (78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). We finalized 

designations for the 2012 standard in December, 

2014 and these designations became effective April 

15, 2015. See 80 FR 2206, January 15, 2015. For 

purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 standard, the regional 

conformity test requirements for all nonattainment 

and maintenance areas in 40 CFR 93.109 will apply 

one year after the effective date of EPA’s 

nonattainment designations in accordance with 

section 93.102(d) and until the effective date of 

revocation of such NAAQS. 

the emissions inventory used in the 

attainment demonstration. 

The direct PM2.5 budgets included 

tailpipe, brake wear, and tire wear 

emissions as well as paved and unpaved 

road dust and road construction dust. 

No budgets for SO2 were included in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan or 2015 Supplement 

because on-road emissions of SO2 are a 

small part (11 percent) of the total SO2

inventory. No budgets for ammonia 

were included in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan or 

2015 Supplement. 

3. Conclusion and Proposed Actions 

We are not acting on the motor 

vehicle emission budgets for direct 

PM2.5, NOX, and VOC in the 2012 PM2.5

Plan or 2015 Supplement. We 

previously approved motor vehicle 

emissions budgets for the 1997 annual 

and 24-hour PM2.5 standards (76 FR 

69928, 69951 (November 9, 2011)), and 

these budgets will continue to apply in 

the South Coast for transportation 

conformity purposes for these 

standards. The same budgets will also 

continue to apply for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 standard until we finalize our 

approval of new budgets in the Serious 

area plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS or 

find those budgets adequate.60

J. General Conformity Budgets 

1. Requirements for General Conformity 

Conformity is required under CAA 

section 176(c) to ensure that federal 

actions are consistent with (‘‘conform 

to’’) the purpose of the SIP. Conformity 

to the purpose of the SIP means that 

federal activities will not cause new air 

quality violations, worsen existing 

violations, or delay timely attainment of 

the relevant NAAQS or interim 

reductions and milestones. Conformity 

applies to areas that are designated 

nonattainment and to maintenance 

areas. 

Section 176(c)(4) of the CAA 

establishes the framework for general 

conformity. The EPA first promulgated 

general conformity regulations in 

November 1993 (40 CFR part 51, subpart 

W, 40 CFR part 93, subpart B). 

Subsequently we revised the general 

conformity regulations on April 5, 2010 

(75 FR 17254). Besides ensuring that 

federal actions not covered by the 

transportation conformity rule will not 

interfere with the SIP, the general 

conformity regulations encourage 

consultation between the federal agency 

and the state or local air pollution 

control agencies before and during the 

environmental review process, as well 

as public notification of and access to 

federal agency conformity 

determinations, and allows for air 

quality review of individual federal 

actions. 

The general conformity regulations 

provides three phases: (A) Applicability 

analysis, (B) conformity determination, 

and (C) review process. The 

applicability analysis phase under 40 

CFR 93.153 is used to find if a Federal 

action requires a conformity 

determination for a specific pollutant. If 

a conformity determination is needed, 

Federal agencies can use one of several 

methods to show that the project 

conforms to the SIP. In an area without 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP), a 

federal action may be shown to 

‘‘conform’’ by demonstrating there will 

be no net increase in emission in the 

nonattainment or maintenance area 

from the Federal action. 

In an area with a SIP, conformity to 

the applicable SIP can be demonstrated 

in one of several ways. For actions 

where the direct and indirect emissions 

exceeds the rates in 40 CFR 93.153(b), 

the federal action can include mitigation 

efforts to bring emissions to levels 

below the thresholds or can show that 

the action will conform by meeting any 

of the following requirements: 

• By showing that the net emission 

increases caused by an action are 

included in the SIP, 

• by documenting that the State 

agrees to include the emission increases 

in the SIP, 

• through offsetting the action’s 

emissions in the same or nearby area of 

equal or greater classification, or 

• through an air quality modeling 

demonstration in some circumstances. 

The general conformity regulations at 

40 CFR 93.161 allow state and local air 

quality agencies working with federal 

agencies with large facilities (e.g., 

commercial airports, ports and large 

military bases) that are subject to the 

general conformity regulations to 

develop and adopt an emissions budget 

for those facilities in order to facilitate 

future conformity determinations. Such 

a budget, referred to as a facility-wide 

emission budget, may be used by federal 

agencies to demonstrate conformity as 

long as the total facility-wide budget 

level identified in the SIP is not 

exceeded. 

According to 40 CFR 93.161, the state 

or local agency responsible for 

implementing and enforcing the SIP can 

develop and adopt an emissions budget 

to be used for demonstrating conformity 

under 40 CFR 93.158(a)(1). The facilitywide budget must (1) be for a set time 

period; (2) cover the pollutants or 

precursors of the pollutants for which 

the area is designated nonattainment or 

maintenance; (3) the budgets are 

specific about what can be emitted on 

an annual or seasonal basis; (4) the 

emissions from the facility along with 

all other emissions in the area will not 

exceed the total SIP emissions budget 

for the nonattainment or maintenance 

area; (5) specific measures are included 

to ensure compliance with the facilitywide budget, such as periodic reporting 

requirements or compliance 

demonstrations when the Federal 

agency is taking an action that would 

otherwise require a conformity 

determination; (6) the budget must be 

submitted to EPA as a SIP revision; and 

(7) the SIP revision must be approved by 

EPA. Having or using a facility-wide 

emissions budget does not preclude a 

Federal agency from demonstrating 

conformity in any other manner allowed 

by the conformity rule. 

2. General Conformity Budget in the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 

The 2012 PM2.5 Plan addresses 

general conformity beginning on page 

II–2–52 of Appendix III. The District 

identified the de minimis thresholds for 

general conformity in the South Coast as 

10 tpy of VOC and NOX because of its 

designation and classification as a 

severe ozone nonattainment area, and 

100 tpy of PM2.5 because of its 

designation and classification as a 

moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area. The 

District examined historical records and 

noted that projects requiring general 

conformity determinations had 

historically not exceeded the PM2.5 de 

minimis levels. The main pollutant of 

concern during project construction was 

NOX, and to a lesser extent, VOC. To 

streamline the general conformity 

process for projects and to facilitate 

general conformity determinations, VOC 

and NOX general conformity budgets of 

1 tpd of NOX and 0.2 tpd of VOC were 

established on an annual basis from 

2013 to 2030. These general conformity 

budgets will be tracked via a tracking 

system that the District sets up for 

projects subject to general conformity 

determinations. The District will count 

project emissions towards the 

applicable general conformity budget 

until the budget has been exhausted. 

Any unused portions will not carry 

forward from year to year. Once the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63657 

61For a general discussion of EPA’s interpretation 

of the reclassification provisions in section 

188(b)(1) of the Act, see the General Preamble, 57 

FR 13498 at 13537–38 (April 16, 1992). 

62See 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009). 

63For a discussion of EPA’s interpretation of the 

requirements of section 188(e), see ‘‘State 

Implementation Plans for Serious PM10

Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers 

for PM10 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 PM10

Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 66 FR 50252 

(October 2, 2001) (proposed action on PM10 Plan for 

Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 (July 25, 

2002) (final action on PM10 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 PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, 

Arizona but generally upholding EPA’s 

interpretation of CAA section 188(e)). 

budget is exhausted, federal projects can 

still demonstrate conformity using other 

provisions in the conformity rule. 

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action 

We propose to approve the general 

conformity budgets in the 2012 PM2.5

Plan for NOX and VOC for 2013 to 2030 

as meeting the requirements of the CAA 

and the general conformity rule. If we 

finalize our approval of these budgets, 

Federal agencies can use these budgets 

to demonstrate that their projects 

conform to the SIP through a letter from 

the state and District confirming that the 

project emissions are accounted for in 

the SIP’s general conformity budgets. 

The District will be responsible for 

tracking emissions from all projects 

against the budgets. Once the budgets 

are used, future federal projects will 

need to demonstrate conformity using a 

different method. Any federal projects 

that emit criteria pollutants or pollutant 

precursors other than those for which 

general conformity budgets are 

established will still need to 

demonstrate conformity for those 

pollutants or precursors. 

V. Proposed Reclassification as Serious 

Nonattainment and Serious Area SIP 

Requirements 

A. Proposed Reclassification as Serious 

and Applicable Attainment Date 

Section 188 of the Act outlines the 

process for classification of PM2.5

nonattainment areas and establishes the 

applicable attainment dates. Under the 

plain meaning of the terms of section 

188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA has general 

authority to reclassify at any time before 

the applicable attainment date any area 

that the EPA determines cannot 

practicably attain the standard by such 

date. Accordingly, section 188(b)(1) of 

the Act is a general expression of 

delegated rulemaking authority. In 

addition, subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 

section 188(b)(1) mandate that the EPA 

reclassify ‘‘appropriate’’ PM10

nonattainment areas at specified time 

frames (i.e., by December 31, 1991 for 

the initial PM10 nonattainment areas, 

and within 18 months after the SIP 

submittal due date for subsequent 

nonattainment areas). These 

subparagraphs do not restrict the EPA’s 

general authority but simply specify 

that, at a minimum, it must be exercised 

at certain times.61

We have reviewed recent PM2.5

monitoring data for the South Coast 

available in the EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database. These data 

show that 24-hour PM2.5 levels in the 

South Coast continue to be above 35 mg/ 

m3, the level of the 2006 PM2.5 standard, 

and the recent trends in the South 

Coast’s 24-hour PM2.5 levels are not 

consistent with a projection of 

attainment by the end of 2015. (See 

Memorandum dated August 21, 2015, 

Michael Flagg, US EPA Region 9, Air 

Quality Analysis Office). 

In accordance with section 188(b)(1) 

of the Act, the EPA is proposing to 

reclassify the South Coast area from 

Moderate to Serious nonattainment for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 

mg/m3, based on the EPA’s 

determination that the South Coast area 

cannot practicably attain this standard 

by the applicable attainment date of 

December 31, 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 South Coast area was designated 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard effective December 14, 2009.62

Therefore, upon final reclassification of 

the South Coast area as a Serious 

nonattainment area, the latest 

permissible attainment date under 

section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for purposes 

of the 2006 PM2.5 standard in this area, 

will be December 31, 2019. 

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 the EPA 

may grant if the State satisfies certain 

conditions. Before the 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.63

B. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Serious PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 

Plans 

Upon reclassification as a Serious 

nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, California will be required to 

submit additional SIP revisions to 

satisfy the statutory requirements that 

apply to Serious PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas, including the requirements of 

subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act. 

The Serious area SIP elements that 

California will be required to 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 PM2.5

and PM2.5 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, 2019, or where the State is seeking 

an extension of the attainment date 

under section 188(e), a demonstration 

that attainment by December 31, 2019 is 

impracticable and that the plan provides 

for attainment by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable and no later 

than December 31, 2024 (CAA sections 

188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A)); 

3. plan provisions that require 

reasonable further progress (RFP) (CAA 

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 PM2.5 also apply to 

major stationary sources of PM2.5

precursors, except where the state 

demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction 

that such sources do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the standard in the area (CAA section 

189(e)); 

6. a comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63658 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

64For 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 PM10 (CAA sections 

189(b)(3)). 

65See 80 FR 15339, ‘‘Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State 

Implementation Plan Requirements,’’ March 23, 

2015. 

66See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992) and Addendum, 59 FR 

41998 (August 16, 1994). 

67Section 172(b) requires the EPA to establish, 

concurrent with nonattainment area designations, a 

schedule extending no later than 3 years from the 

date of the nonattainment designation for states to 

submit plans or plan revisions meeting the 

applicable requirements of sections 110(a)(2) and 

172(c) of the CAA. 

68 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009). 

69NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 

70 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014). The EPA notes that 

some states had already made SIP submissions 

intended to meet applicable nonattainment plan 

requirements as interpreted in the remanded 2007 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule. Accordingly, the new 

SIP submission deadline provided the opportunity 

for states to revise or supplement their prior 

submissions, as necessary or appropriate to meet 

subpart 4 requirements. 

71For areas designated nonattainment after 

November 15, 1990, section 188(b)(1)(B) of the Act 

requires that the EPA ‘‘reclassify appropriate areas 

within 18 months after the required date for the 

State’s submission of a SIP for the Moderate Area.’’ 

Read together with section 189(a)(2)(B), which 

requires states to submit Moderate Area plans 

within 18 months after nonattainment designations, 

section 188(b)(1)(B) generally contemplates that 

EPA would reclassify appropriate areas as Serious 

nonattainment no later than 36 months (3 years) 

after initial nonattainment designations. Under 

these circumstances, the required Serious area 

attainment demonstration would normally be 

submitted no later than 7 years after initial 

designation (4 years after reclassification), which is 

3 years before the latest permissible attainment date 

under CAA section 188(c)(2). 

sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 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 nonattainment 

new source review (NSR) program to 

lower the applicable ‘‘major stationary 

source’’ 64 thresholds from 100 tons per 

year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section 

189(b)(3)). 

Final reclassification of the South 

Coast area as Serious nonattainment for 

the 2006 PM2.5 standard 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 for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. 

See 80 FR 15339 at 15441. 

In March of 2015, the EPA issued a 

proposed rulemaking to provide 

guidance to states on the attainment 

planning requirements in subparts 1 and 

4 of part D, title I of the Act that apply 

to areas designated nonattainment for 

PM2.5.65 In the interim, before the PM2.5

implementation rule is finalized, the 

EPA encourages the State to review the 

proposed rulemaking as well as the 

General Preamble and Addendum for 

guidance on how to implement these 

statutory requirements in the South 

Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area.66

C. Statutory Deadline for Submittal of 

the Serious Area Plan 

For an area reclassified as a Serious 

nonattainment area before the 

applicable attainment date under CAA 

section 188(b)(1), section 189(b)(2) 

requires the State to submit the required 

BACM provisions ‘‘no later than 18 

months after reclassification of the area 

as a Serious Area’’ and to submit the 

required attainment demonstration ‘‘no 

later than 4 years after reclassification of 

the area to Serious.’’ Section 189(b)(2) 

establishes outer bounds on the SIP 

submission deadlines and does not 

preclude the EPA’s establishment of 

earlier deadlines as necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions and to 

implement the statutory requirements. 

If a final reclassification of the South 

Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area to 

Serious becomes effective by early 2016, 

the Act provides the State with up to 18 

months after this date (i.e., until mid2017) to submit the required BACM 

provisions. Because an up-to-date 

emissions inventory serves as the 

foundation for a state’s BACM and 

BACT determinations, the EPA also 

proposes to require the State to submit 

the emissions inventory required under 

CAA section 172(c)(3) within 18 months 

after the effective date of final 

reclassification. Similarly, because an 

effective evaluation of BACM and BACT 

measures requires evaluation of the 

precursor pollutants that must be 

controlled to provide for expeditious 

attainment in the area, if the State 

chooses to submit an optional precursor 

insignificance demonstration to support 

a determination to exclude a PM2.5

precursor from the required control 

measure evaluations for the area, the 

EPA proposes to require the State to 

submit any such demonstration by this 

same date. An 18-month timeframe for 

submission of these plan elements is 

consistent with both the timeframe for 

submission of BACM provisions under 

CAA section 189(b)(2) and the 

timeframe for submission of subpart 1 

plan elements under section 172(b) of 

the Act.67

The EPA proposes to require the State 

to submit the attainment demonstration 

required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and 

the remaining attainment-related plan 

elements no later than three years after 

the effective date of final reclassification 

or by December 31, 2018, whichever is 

earlier. The attainment-related plan 

elements that we propose to require 

within the same 3-year timeframe as the 

attainment demonstration are: (1) The 

RFP demonstration required under 

section 172(c)(2); (2) the quantitative 

milestones required under section 

189(c); (3) any additional control 

measures necessary to meet the 

requirements of section 172(c)(6); and 

(4) the contingency measures required 

under section 172(c)(9). Although 

section 189(b)(2) generally provides for 

up to 4 years after a discretionary 

reclassification for the State to submit 

the required attainment demonstration, 

it is appropriate in this case for the EPA 

to establish an earlier SIP submission 

deadline to assure timely 

implementation of the statutory 

requirements. 

The EPA designated the South Coast 

area as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard effective December 14, 2009.68

On January 4, 2013, the D.C. Circuit 

Court of Appeals issued its decision in 

NRDC remanding EPA’s 2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule and directing the 

EPA to repromulgate it in accordance 

with the requirements of subpart 4.69 In 

response to the NRDC decision, the EPA 

undertook a rulemaking to classify all 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas as Moderate 

nonattainment and begin implementing 

the PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4. 

Effective July 2, 2014, the EPA classified 

all areas previously designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS as Moderate 

nonattainment under subpart 4 and 

established a December 31, 2014 

deadline for states to submit Moderate 

area SIP elements required for these 

areas.70 These unusual circumstances 

have significantly shortened the 

timeframes ordinarily allowed under the 

Act for the EPA and the states to address 

the statutory SIP requirements following 

reclassification of an area from 

Moderate to Serious nonattainment 

under subpart 4.71

Our proposal to require the State to 

submit the attainment demonstration 

and other attainment-related plan 

elements no later than three years after 

reclassification or by December 31, 

2018, whichever is earlier, is supported 

by the overall structure and purpose of 

the attainment planning requirements in 

part D, title I of the Act. Section 

188(b)(1) provides the EPA with 

discretionary authority to reclassify an 

area as Serious nonattainment at any 

time before the applicable attainment 

date, based on a determination that the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63659 

72 Id. 

73CAA section 189(b)(2). By contrast, for an area 

that is reclassified as Serious by operation of law 

after the applicable attainment date, which may be 

as late as the end of the 6th year after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment (CAA section 

188(b)(1)), the state must submit both the BACM 

provisions and the Serious area attainment 

demonstration no later than 18 months after 

reclassification. Id. 

74Under CAA section 188(c)(2), the latest 

permissible attainment date for a Serious PM2.5

nonattainment area is no later than the end of the 

tenth calendar year beginning after the area’s 

designation as nonattainment. 

75 Id. 

76Section 189(e) requires that the control 

requirements applicable to major stationary sources 

of PM2.5 also apply to major stationary sources of 

PM2.5 precursors, except where the state 

demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction that such 

sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5

levels that exceed the standard in the area. 

77 ‘‘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.’’ 

area cannot practicably attain the 

NAAQS by the Moderate area 

attainment date. Under normal 

circumstances, where the EPA 

reclassifies an area within 3 years after 

its designation as nonattainment, as 

contemplated in CAA section 

188(b)(1)(B),72 the required BACM 

provisions would be due no later than 

18 months after reclassification (i.e., no 

later than 4.5 years after designation) 

and the required attainment 

demonstration would be due no later 

than 4 years after reclassification (i.e., 

no later than 7 years after 

designation).73 In these circumstances, 

the Serious area attainment 

demonstration would be due at least 3 

years before the outermost Serious area 

attainment date for the area,74 thus 

providing the EPA with sufficient time 

to evaluate the submitted plan well in 

advance of the statutory attainment 

date. However, in situations such as 

this, where the EPA reclassifies an area 

pursuant to its discretionary 

reclassification authority later than 3 

years after the area’s designation as 

nonattainment, it is appropriate for the 

EPA to consider the outermost Serious 

area attainment date applicable to the 

area in setting a deadline for the State 

to submit the required elements of the 

Serious area attainment plan. 

Upon reclassification as Serious, the 

South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area 

will be subject to a Serious area 

attainment date no later than December 

31, 2019.75 Sections 189(b)(1)(A) and 

189(c) of the Act require the State to 

submit a demonstration that the plan 

provides for attainment of the PM2.5

standard by this date, including 

quantitative milestones which are to be 

achieved every 3 years until the area is 

redesignated attainment and which 

demonstrate reasonable further progress 

toward attainment by this date. If the 

EPA reclassifies the South Coast area 

effective in early 2016 and allows the 

State 4 years following reclassification 

(i.e., potentially until early 2020) to 

submit the attainment demonstration 

and related plan elements, these Serious 

area plan provisions would not be due 

until after the latest permissible 

statutory attainment date for the area 

(December 31, 2019) has come and gone. 

Thus, under such circumstances, 

allowing the maximum 4-year 

timeframe for submission of the 

required attainment demonstration and 

related plan elements would frustrate 

the statutory design and severely 

constrain the EPA’s ability to ensure 

that the State is implementing the 

applicable statutory requirements in a 

timely manner. 

Therefore, it is appropriate for the 

EPA to require California to submit the 

required attainment demonstration and 

other attainment-related plan elements 

no later than 3 years after final 

reclassification or by December 31, 

2018, whichever is earlier, so that the 

EPA has adequate time to review and 

act on the State’s submission prior to 

the latest permissible attainment date 

for the area under section 188(c)(2), 

which is December 31, 2019. This 

timeframe for the required Serious area 

plan submissions is appropriate to 

assure consistency among the required 

submissions and to implement the 

statutory requirements in a timely 

manner. 

Finally, the EPA proposes to require 

that the State submit revised 

nonattainment NSR program 

requirements no later than 18 months 

after final reclassification. The Act does 

not specify a deadline for the State’s 

submission of SIP revisions to meet 

nonattainment NSR program 

requirements to lower the ‘‘major 

stationary source’’ threshold from 100 

tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA 

section 189(b)(3)) and to address the 

control requirements for major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors 

(CAA section 189(e)) 76 following 

reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment under subpart 4. 

Pursuant to the EPA’s gap-filling 

authority in CAA section 301(a) and to 

effectuate the statutory control 

requirements in section 189 of the Act, 

the EPA proposes to require the State to 

submit these nonattainment NSR SIP 

revisions, as well as any necessary 

analysis of and additional control 

requirements for major stationary 

sources of PM2.5 precursors, no later 

than 18 months after the effective date 

of final reclassification of the South 

Coast area as Serious nonattainment for 

the 2006 PM2.5 standard. This due date 

will ensure that necessary control 

requirements for major sources are 

established well in advance of the 

required attainment demonstration. An 

18-month timeframe for submission of 

the NNSR SIP revisions also aligns with 

the statutory deadline for submission of 

BACM and BACT provisions and the 

broader analysis of PM2.5 precursors for 

potential controls on existing sources in 

the area. 

VI. Reclassification of Reservation 

Areas of Indian Country 

Seven Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area. These tribes are 

listed in Table 4 below. 

TABLE 4—INDIAN TRIBES LOCATED IN

SOUTH COAST PM2.5 NONATTAINMENT AREA

Cahuilla Band of Indians 

Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians 

Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians 

of the Pechanga Reservation 

Ramona Band of Cahuilla 

San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians 

of the San Manuel Reservation 

Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians 

Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians 

We have considered the relevance of 

our proposal to reclassify the South 

Coast area as Serious nonattainment for 

the 2006 PM2.5 standard to each tribe 

located within the South Coast area. We 

believe that the same facts and 

circumstances that support the proposal 

for the non-Indian country lands also 

support the proposal for reservation 

areas of Indian country 77 and any other 

area of Indian country where the EPA or 

a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe 

has jurisdiction located within the 

South Coast nonattainment area. The 

EPA is therefore proposing to exercise 

our authority under CAA section 

188(b)(1) to reclassify areas of Indian 

country geographically located in the 

South Coast nonattainment area. Section 

188(b)(1) broadly authorizes the EPA to 

reclassify a nonattainment area— 

including any Indian country located 

within such an area—that EPA 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63660 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

78We sent letters to seven tribal officials 

regarding government-to-government consultation 

on September 4, 2015 and September 30, 2015. 

determines cannot practicably attain the 

relevant standard by the applicable 

attainment date. 

Directly-emitted PM2.5 and its 

precursor pollutants (NOX, SO2, VOC, 

and ammonia) are emitted throughout a 

nonattainment area and can be 

transported throughout that 

nonattainment area. Therefore, 

boundaries for nonattainment areas are 

drawn to encompass both areas with 

direct sources of the pollution problem 

as well as nearby areas in the same 

airshed. Initial classifications of 

nonattainment areas are coterminous 

with, that is, they match exactly, their 

boundaries. The EPA believes this 

approach best ensures public health 

protection from the adverse effects of 

PM2.5 pollution. Therefore, it is 

generally counterproductive from an air 

quality and planning perspective to 

have a disparate classification for a land 

area located within the boundaries of a 

nonattainment area, such as the 

reservation areas of Indian country 

contained within the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area. Moreover, 

violations of the 2006 PM2.5 standard, 

which are measured and modeled 

throughout the nonattainment area, as 

well as shared meteorological 

conditions, would dictate the same 

conclusion. Furthermore, emissions 

increases in portions of a PM2.5

nonattainment area that are left 

classified as Moderate could counteract 

the effects of efforts to attain the 

standard within the overall area because 

less stringent requirements would apply 

in those Moderate portions relative to 

those that would apply in the portions 

of the area reclassified to Serious. 

Uniformity of classification 

throughout a nonattainment area is thus 

a guiding principle and premise when 

an area is being reclassified. Equally, if 

the EPA believes it is likely that a given 

nonattainment area will not attain the 

PM2.5 standard by the applicable 

attainment date, then it may be an 

additional reason why it is appropriate 

to maintain a uniform classification 

within the area and thus to reclassify 

the reservation areas of Indian country 

and any other area where the EPA or a 

tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction together with the balance of 

the nonattainment area. In this 

particular case, we are proposing to 

determine, based on the State’s 

demonstration and current ambient air 

quality trends, that the South Coast 

nonattainment area cannot practicably 

attain the 2006 PM2.5 standard by its 

applicable Moderate area attainment 

date of December 31, 2015. 

In light of the considerations outlined 

above that support retention of a 

uniformly-classified PM2.5

nonattainment area, and our finding that 

it is impracticable for the area to attain 

by the applicable attainment date, we 

propose to reclassify the areas of Indian 

country within the South Coast 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

standard. 

The effect of reclassification would be 

to lower the applicable ‘‘major source’’ 

threshold for purposes of the 

nonattainment new source review 

program and the Title V operating 

permit program from its current level of 

100 tpy to 70 tpy (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 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, the EPA has 

contacted tribal officials to invite 

government-to-government consultation 

on this rulemaking effort.78 The EPA 

specifically solicits additional comment 

on this proposed rule from tribal 

officials. We note that although eligible 

tribes may 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. 

VII. Summary of Proposed Actions and 

Request for Public Comment 

Under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA 

is proposing to approve the following 

elements of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 

2015 Supplement submitted by 

California to address the CAA’s 

Moderate area planning requirements 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South 

Coast nonattainment area: 

1. The 2008 base year emissions 

inventories as meeting the requirements 

of CAA section 172(c)(3); 

2. the reasonably available control 

measures/reasonably available control 

technology demonstration as meeting 

the requirements of CAA sections 

172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C); 

3. the reasonable further progress 

demonstration as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2); 

4. the demonstration that attainment 

by the Moderate area attainment date of 

December 31, 2015 is impracticable as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii); and 

5. SCAQMD’s commitments to adopt 

and implement specific rules and 

measures in accordance with the 

schedule provided in Chapter 4 of the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan, as revised by Table F– 

1 of Attachment F of the 2015 

Supplement, to achieve the emissions 

reductions shown therein, and to submit 

these rules and measures to ARB for 

transmittal to EPA as a revision to the 

SIP, as stated on pp. 7–8 of SCAQMD 

Governing Board Resolution 12–19. 

In addition, the EPA is proposing to 

approve the general conformity budgets 

for NOX and VOC for years 2013–2030 

listed in Appendix III, p. III–2–53 of the 

2012 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the 

requirements of the CAA and the 

general conformity rule. 

Finally, pursuant to CAA section 

188(b)(1), the EPA is proposing to 

reclassify the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area, including the 

reservation areas of Indian country and 

any other area where the EPA or a tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction within the South Coast area, 

as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 standard based on the agency’s 

determination that the South Coast area 

cannot practicably attain the standard 

by the Moderate area attainment date of 

December 31, 2015. Upon final 

reclassification as a Serious area, 

California will be required to submit, 

within 18 months after the effective date 

of the reclassification, provisions to 

assure that BACM shall be implemented 

no later than 4 years after the date of 

reclassification and to submit, within 3 

years after the effective date of 

reclassification or by December 31, 

2018, which is sooner, a Serious area 

plan that satisfies the requirements of 

part D of title I of the Act. This plan 

must include a demonstration that the 

South Coast area will attain the 2006 

PM2.5 standard as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than December 

31, 2019, or by the most expeditious 

alternative date practicable and no later 

than December 31, 2024, in accordance 

with the requirements of CAA sections 

189(b) and 188(e). 

In addition, because the EPA is 

proposing to similarly reclassify 

reservation areas of Indian country and 

any other area of Indian country where 

EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 63661 

tribe has jurisdiction within the South 

Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area as 

Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 standard, consistent with our 

proposed reclassification of the 

surrounding non-Indian country lands, 

the EPA has invited consultation with 

interested tribes concerning this issue. 

We note that although eligible tribes 

may seek the EPA’s 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. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on these proposals for the next 

30 days. The deadline and instructions 

for submission of comments are 

provided in the DATES and ADDRESSES

sections at the beginning of this 

preamble. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.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 it 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. This proposed action would 

approve State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and would not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. Additionally, the 

proposed rule would reclassify the 

South Coast nonattainment area as 

Serious nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and would not itself 

regulate small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain an 

unfunded mandate of $100 million or 

more as described in UMRA, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This proposed action 

would approve State law as meeting 

Federal requirements and would not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. 

Additionally, the proposed action 

would reclassify the South Coast 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, and would not itself impose 

any federal intergovernmental mandate. 

The proposed action would not require 

any tribes to submit implementation 

plans. 

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 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires the 

EPA to develop an accountable process 

to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input 

by tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have Tribal 

implications’’ is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian Tribes.’’ 

Seven Indian tribes are located within 

the boundaries of the South Coast 

nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS: The Cahuilla Band of Indians, 

the Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission 

Indians, the Pechanga Band of Luiseno 

Mission Indians of the Pechanga 

Reservation, the Ramona Band of 

Cahuilla, the San Manuel Band of 

Serrano Mission Indians of the San 

Manuel Reservation, the Santa Rosa 

Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the 

Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

The EPA has concluded that this 

proposed rule might have tribal 

implications for the purposes of 

Executive Order 13175, but would not 

impose substantial direct costs upon the 

tribes, nor would it preempt Tribal law. 

We note that only one of the tribes 

located in the South Coast 

nonattainment area (the Pechanga Band 

of Luiseno Mission Indians of the 

Pechanga Reservation) has requested 

eligibility to administer programs under 

the CAA. The proposed rule would 

affect the EPA’s implementation of the 

new source review program because of 

the lower ‘‘major source’’ threshold 

triggered by reclassification (70 tons per 

year for direct PM2.5 and precursors to 

PM2.5). The proposed rule 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 the potential implications, the 

EPA contacted tribal officials during the 

process of developing this proposed rule 

to provide an opportunity to have 

meaningful and timely input into its 

development. On September 4, 2015, we 

sent letters to leaders of the seven tribes 

with areas of Indian country in the 

South Coast nonattainment area inviting 

government-to-government consultation 

on the rulemaking effort. We requested 

that the tribal leaders, or their 

designated consultation representatives, 

provide input or request government-togovernment consultation by October 4, 

2015. We intend to continue 

communicating with all seven tribes 

located within the boundaries of the 

South Coast nonattainment area for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as we move forward 

in developing a final rule. The EPA 

specifically solicits additional comment 

on this proposed rule from tribal 

officials. 

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 proposed action 

is not subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it would approve a state action 

implementing a federal standard, and 

reclassify the South Coast 

nonattainment area as Serious 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

63662 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, triggering Serious area 

planning requirements under the CAA. 

This proposed 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 proposed 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 rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA has determined that this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. This proposed action 

would only approve a state action 

implementing a federal standard, and 

reclassify the South Coast 

nonattainment area as Serious 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, triggering additional Serious 

area planning requirements under the 

CAA. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Oxides of nitrogen, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 30, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9. 

[FR Doc. 2015–26315 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2