The EPA Regional Administrator, Jared Blumenfeld signed the following final 

rule on September 25, 2013 and EPA is submitting it for publication in the 

Federal Register (FR). While we have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of 

this Internet version of the final rule, it is not the official version of 

the final rule. Please refer to the official version in a forthcoming FR 

publication appearing on the Government Printing Office’s FDsys website, 

http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action and on Regulation.gov in Docket 

Number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384, http://www.regulations.gov.

Billing Code: 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384; FRL-] 

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; 

South Coast; Contingency Measures for 1997 PM2.5 Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State implementation plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by California to address Clean Air Act (CAA) 

contingency measure requirements for the 1997 annual and 24-hour 

national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air 

Basin (South Coast). Approval of this SIP revision terminates 

the sanctions clocks and a federal implementation plan (FIP) 

clock that were triggered by EPA’s partial disapproval of a 

related SIP submission on November 5, 2011 (76 FR 69928). 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on [INSERT DATE 

30 DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGSITER]. 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

2

ADDRESSES: You may inspect the supporting information for this 

action, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384, by 

one of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking portal, http://www.regulations.gov,

please follow the online instructions; or, 

2. Visit our regional office at, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-

3901. 

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 

electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at 

EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. 

While documents in the docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., voluminous records, large maps, copyrighted 

material), and some may not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., Confidential Business Information). To inspect 

the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during 

normal business hours with the contact listed directly below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972-3959, lo.doris@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we,” “us” 

and “our” refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

3

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

II. Public Comment and EPA Response 

III. EPA's Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

On June 24, 2013 (78 FR 37741), EPA proposed to approve the 

“South Coast Air Quality Management District Proposed 

Contingency Measures for the 2007 PM2.5 SIP” (dated October 

2011), which the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted 

on November 14, 2011 and supplemented on April 24, 2013 

(collectively the “Contingency Measures SIP”). EPA proposed to 

approve the Contingency Measures SIP as satisfying the 

attainment contingency measure requirement in CAA section 

172(c)(9) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and to conclude that the 

reasonable further progress (RFP) contingency measure 

requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 2012 milestone year 

is moot because the South Coast area has achieved the emission 

reduction benchmarks for the 2012 RFP year. Our June 24, 2013 

proposed rule provides the rationale for this action. 

II. Public Comment and EPA Response 

EPA provided a 30-day public comment period on our proposed 

action. The comment period ended on July 24, 2013. We received 

one public comment and respond to that comment below. 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

4

Comment: A private citizen asserted that there has been no 

attempt to address methane outgassing and the many oil fields in 

the South Coast area. The commenter also stated that train 

maintenance, promotion of bicycles and rail, automobile and 

truck lane reductions, digital signage, outdoor wood burning and 

landfills are not being adequately addressed, that health risk 

assessments should be required, that there are cancer clusters 

in the area, and that “the political handling of [the] air 

quality problem does not change the quality of life and health 

of” South Coast area residents. 

Response: The commenter’s submission contained only general 

observations and conclusions that are outside the scope of EPA’s 

rulemaking action. While expressing a broad range of 

environmental concerns, the commenter failed to identify any 

specific issue relevant to EPA’s proposed action on the 

Contingency Measures SIP, and did not address the basis for 

EPA’s approval of the South Coast’s contingency measures. To 

the extent the commenter intended to encourage additional review 

and evaluation of air pollution sources in the South Coast area, 

and additional potential transportation and control measures 

that may reduce air pollution, EPA encourages the commenter to 

participate in the regulatory processes carried out by the South 

Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), CARB, and other 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

5

State/local agencies involved in the development of air quality 

management plans for the South Coast area. EPA finds no basis in 

the comment to change its views on the approvability of the 

specific contingency measures at issue in this rulemaking. 

III. EPA's Final Action 

We are finalizing our proposal to conclude that the 

Contingency Measures SIP submitted by CARB on November 14, 2011, 

as supplemented on April 24, 2013, satisfies the attainment 

contingency measure requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast nonattainment area. We 

therefore fully approve this submission into the California SIP. 

This final action is based in part on EPA’s final rule approving 

SCAQMD Rule 444 and Rule 445, which was signed by Jared 

Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Region IX, on August 22, 

2013. See “Revisions to Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District” Final Rule, signed August 22, 2013 

(pre-publication copy).1 

We are also finalizing our proposal to conclude that the 

RFP contingency measure requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) for 

the 2012 milestone year is moot as applied to the South Coast 

 

1 EPA’s proposal to approve the Contingency Measures SIP relied in part on a 

simultaneous proposal to approve Rule 444 and Rule 445, which we stated would 

provide SIP-creditable PM2.5 emission reductions upon final EPA approval of 

these rules into the SIP. See 78 FR at 37745-37746 and 37751, Table 4. 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

6

because the area achieved its SIP-approved emission reduction 

benchmarks for the 2012 RFP year. 

Today’s final approval corrects deficiencies that were the 

basis for EPA’s partial disapproval of the South Coast PM2.5 SIP 

on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69928) and therefore terminates the 

CAA section 179(b) sanctions clocks triggered by that action and 

the obligation on EPA to promulgate a FIP within two years of 

that action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 

applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 

52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to 

approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves 

State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this action: 

· is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to 

review by the Office of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

7

· does not impose an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.); 

· is certified as not having a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

· does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); 

· does not have Federalism implications as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); 

· is not an economically significant regulatory action 

based on health or safety risks subject to Executive 

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

· is not a significant regulatory action subject to 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

· is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those 

requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air 

Act; and 

· does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 

address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

8

environmental effects, using practicable and legally 

permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 

7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because it does not apply in Indian country located in 

the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as 

added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, 

the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, 

which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this action and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. 

A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is 

published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major 

rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial 

review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

9

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS 

FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final 

rule does not affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within 

which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action 

may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, 

Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

__9/25/13____________ __/s/________________________

Dated: Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, 

Region IX. 

 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

10

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

is amended as follows: 

PART 52 APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS. 

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

follows: 

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

Subpart F — California 

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(432) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(432) The following plan was submitted on November 14, 2011, by 

the Governor's Designee. 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional materials. 

(A) South Coast Air Quality Management District. 

(1) South Coast Air Quality Management District Proposed 

Contingency Measures for the 2007 PM2.5 SIP (dated October 2011) 

(“Contingency Measures SIP”), adopted October 7, 2011. 

(2) SCAQMD Resolution No. 11-24, dated October 7, 2011, adopting 

the Contingency Measures SIP. 

(3) Letter dated April 24, 2013 from Elaine Chang, Deputy 

Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air 
This document is a prepublication version signed by EPA Regional 

Administrator Jared Blumenfeld on September 25, 2013. We have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

11

Division, EPA Region 9, Re: “Update of the 2012 RFP Emissions 

and 2015 Reductions from Contingency Measures for the 2007 

Annual PM2.5 Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air 

Basin,” including attachments. 

(B) State of California Air Resources Board. 

(1) CARB Executive Order S-11-023, dated November 14, 2011, 

adopting the Contingency Measures SIP.