Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0096-0047
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Infrastructure Requirements for Ozone
Posted Date: 2021-03-30T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 30, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16533-16538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06110]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0096; FRL-10015-36-Region 9]

Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State 
Implementation Plans; California; Infrastructure Requirements for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to partially approve and partially disapprove the state 
implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of 
California pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or 
``Act'') for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 
2015 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') 
for ozone. Specifically, the EPA is approving the SIP revision for all 
elements except those that relate to prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD). EPA is partially approving and partially 
disapproving three elements of the SIP revision due to PSD deficiencies 
in certain air pollution control or air quality management districts 
(APCD, AQMD, or ``district''). The disapprovals will not create any new 
consequences for these districts or the EPA as the districts are 
already subject to the EPA's federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21. As 
part of this action, we are also reclassifying certain regions of the 
State for emergency episode planning purposes with respect to ozone. We 
are also approving into the SIP two updated state provisions addressing 
CAA conflict of interest requirements for the entire state, and 
emergency episode plans for the Amador County APCD, Calaveras County 
APCD, Mariposa County APCD, Northern Sierra AQMD, and Tuolumne County 
APCD. Finally, we are approving an exemption from emergency episode 
planning requirements for ozone for the Lake County AQMD.

DATES: This rule is effective April 29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0096. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance 
in a language other than English or if you are a person with 
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, 
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panah Stauffer, Air Planning Office 
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, 
(415) 972-3247, or by email at stauffer.panah@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. NAAQS Addressed by This Final Rule
    C. California's Submittals
    D. EPA's Proposal
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
    A. Partial Approvals and Partial Disapprovals
    B. Approval of Updated California Code of Regulations Provisions
    C. Approval of Reclassification Requests for Emergency Episode 
Planning
    D. Approval of Emergency Episode Contingency Plans
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. Statutory Requirements

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires each state to submit to the 
EPA, within three years after the promulgation of a

[[Page 16534]]

primary or secondary NAAQS or any revision thereof, a SIP revision that 
provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such 
NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA contains the infrastructure SIP 
requirements, which generally relate to the information, authorities, 
compliance assurances, procedural requirements, and control measures 
that constitute the ``infrastructure'' of a state's air quality 
management program. These infrastructure SIP requirements (or 
``elements'') required by section 110(a)(2) are as follows:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control 
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data 
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control 
measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate pollution transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate pollution abatement 
and international air pollution.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, 
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government 
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and 
reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government 
officials, public notification, prevention of significant deterioration 
(PSD), and visibility protection.
     Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submittal 
of modeling data.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by 
affected local entities.
    Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by 
the three-year submittal deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are 
therefore not addressed in this action. These two elements are: (i) 
Section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs 
required under part D (nonattainment new source review (NSR)), and (ii) 
section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the nonattainment planning 
requirements of part D. As a result, this action does not address 
requirements for the nonattainment NSR portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) 
or the whole of section 110(a)(2)(I).

B. NAAQS Addressed by This Final Rule

    Ground-level ozone pollution is formed from the reaction of 
volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in 
the presence of sunlight. These two pollutants, referred to as ozone 
precursors, are emitted by many types of sources, including on-and off-
road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and industrial 
facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden equipment 
and paints. Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health 
effects occur following exposure to elevated levels of ozone, 
particularly in children and adults with lung disease. Breathing air 
containing ozone can reduce lung function and inflame airways, which 
can increase respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma or other lung 
diseases.
    On October 26, 2015, the EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for 
ozone.\1\ The EPA had previously promulgated NAAQS for ozone in 1979, 
1997 and 2008. The 2015 ozone NAAQS revised the level of the standards 
to 0.070 parts per million (ppm) averaged across eight hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 65292.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. California's Submittals

    In California, the California Air Resources Board (CARB or 
``State'') is the state agency responsible for the adoption of 
California SIPs and SIP revisions and submission to the EPA. CARB 
submitted its infrastructure SIP revision (``2018 Infrastructure SIP'' 
or ``California's 2018 Submittal'') for the 2015 ozone NAAQS on October 
1, 2018.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Letter dated October 1, 2018, from Richard W. Corey, 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Michael Stoker, Regional Administrator, 
EPA Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 25, 2020, CARB supplemented its 2018 Infrastructure SIP by 
submitting ozone emergency episode contingency plans for San Luis 
Obispo County APCD, Amador County APCD, Calaveras County APCD, Mariposa 
County APCD, Northern Sierra AQMD, and Tuolumne County APCD.\3\ It also 
submitted an exemption request from emergency episode planning 
requirements for Lake County AQMD based on that District's attainment 
status. This submittal (``California's 2020 Submittal'') addresses CAA 
section 110(a)(2)(G) requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Letter dated June 16, 2020, from Richard W. Corey, Executive 
Officer, CARB, to John Busterud, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 
IX, with Ozone Emergency Episode Plans for Amador County, San Luis 
Obispo County, Northern Sierra, Tuolumne County, Mariposa County, 
and Calaveras County and Exemption Request for Lake County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We refer to these submittals collectively herein as ``California's 
Infrastructure SIP Submittals.''

D. EPA's Proposal

    On October 16, 2020, we proposed to partially approve and partially 
disapprove California's Infrastructure SIP Submittals.\4\ Specifically, 
we proposed to approve the submittals for the requirements of CAA 
sections 110(a)(2)(A), 110(a)(2)(B), 110(a)(2)(E), 110(a)(2)(F), 
110(a)(2)(G), 110(a)(2)(H), 110(a)(2)(K), 110(a)(2)(L), and 
110(a)(2)(M). We also proposed to partially approve and partially 
disapprove the submittal for CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D), 
and 110(a)(2)(J) due to PSD program deficiencies in certain air 
districts. These partial disapprovals will not create any new 
consequences for these districts or the EPA as the districts are 
already subject to the EPA's federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21. They 
will also not create any new highway sanctions, which are not triggered 
by disapprovals of infrastructure SIPs. Today's rule finalizes the 
October 16, 2020 proposal in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 85 FR 65755.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At this time, the EPA is not acting on the interstate transport 
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which prohibit emission sources 
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with 
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The EPA will propose action 
on the interstate transport requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS in a 
separate rulemaking.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period 
that ended on November 16, 2020. During this period, the EPA received 
one comment from an anonymous commenter.\5\ The comment is not relevant 
to the EPA's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The comment letter is available in the docket for this 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

A. Partial Approvals and Partial Disapprovals

    Under CAA section 110(a), we are partially approving and partially 
disapproving California's Infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2015 
ozone NAAQS. Specifically, we are approving the submittal for the 
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), 110(a)(2)(B), 110(a)(2)(E), 
110(a)(2)(F), 110(a)(2)(G),s 110(a)(2)(H), 110(a)(2)(K), 110(a)(2)(L),

[[Page 16535]]

and 110(a)(2)(M). We are also partially approving and partially 
disapproving the submittal for CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D), 
and 110(a)(2)(J) due to PSD program deficiencies in Amador, Antelope 
Valley, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, 
Mendocino, Modoc, Mojave Desert, North Coast, Northern Sierra, Northern 
Sonoma, Sacramento Metro, San Diego, Shasta, Siskiyou, South Coast, 
Tehama, and Tuolumne air districts. These partial disapprovals will not 
create any new consequences as the air districts with PSD deficiencies 
are already subject to PSD federal implementation plans (FIPs).
    At this time, EPA is not acting on the interstate transport 
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which prohibit emission sources 
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with 
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The EPA will propose action 
on the interstate transport requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS in a 
separate rulemaking.

B. Approval of Updated California Code of Regulations Provisions

    California's Infrastructure SIP Submittals included an updated 
version of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 2, section 
18700, which maintains the key provisions of that section and also 
incorporates language in CCR, Title 2, section 18701 that the EPA 
previously approved into the SIP to meet the conflict of interest 
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and 128. It also included 
an updated version of CCR, Title 2, section 18701. We proposed to 
approve the updated versions of CCR, Title 2, sections 18700 and 18701 
into the SIP in our October 16, 2020 rulemaking. These updated 
provisions continue to meet the conflict of interest requirements of 
CAA sections 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and 128. We are finalizing approval, as 
proposed, of these updated provisions with this action.

C. Approval of Reclassification Requests for Emergency Episode Planning

    In its 2018 submittal, CARB requested that the EPA reclassify three 
air quality control regions (AQCRs) with respect to the emergency 
episode planning requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart H, as applicable to ozone.\6\ The air quality tests 
for classifying AQCRs are prescribed in 40 CFR 51.150 and are 
pollutant-specific (e.g., ozone) rather than being specific to any 
given NAAQS (e.g., 1997 ozone NAAQS). Consistent with the provisions of 
40 CFR 51.153, reclassification of AQCRs must rely on the most recent 
three years of air quality data. For ozone, an AQCR with a 1-hour ozone 
level greater than 0.10 ppm over the most recent three-year period must 
be classified Priority I, while all other areas are classified Priority 
III. AQCRs that are classified Priority I are required to have SIP-
approved emergency episode contingency plans, while those classified 
Priority III are not required to have such plans, pursuant to 40 CFR 
51.151 and 51.152. We interpret 40 CFR 51.153 as establishing the means 
for states to review air quality data and request a higher or lower 
classification for any given region and as providing the regulatory 
basis for the EPA to reclassify such regions, as appropriate, under CAA 
sections 110(a)(2)(G) and 301(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In our proposed rulemaking, we inadvertently stated that 
CARB requested to re-classify the AQCRs for NO2 and 
SO2. CARB did not make such a request in either of its 
submittals for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and we did not propose to re-
classify the AQCRs for those NAAQS in our proposal. See 85 FR 65755, 
65773 (October 16, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the basis of California's ambient air quality data for 2015-
2017, we are finalizing approval, as proposed, of California's request 
to reclassify Lake County, North Central Coast, and South Central Coast 
to Priority I areas for ozone.

D. Approval of Emergency Episode Contingency Plans

    To meet the requirements of CAA 110(a)(2)(G), California's 2020 
Submittal included the ozone emergency episode contingency plans for 
Amador County APCD, San Luis Obispo County APCD, Northern Sierra AQMD, 
Tuolumne County APCD, Mariposa County APCD, and Calaveras County APCD, 
as well as the exemption request for Lake County AQMD based on its 
attainment status. The contingency plans meet the requirements of 40 
CFR 51.152(a) to specify two or more stages of episode criteria, 
provide for public announcement whenever any episode stage has been 
determined to exist, and to specify adequate emission control actions 
to be taken at each episode stage. The emergency episode contingency 
plans also meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.152(b) to provide for 
prompt acquisition of forecasts of atmospheric stagnation conditions, 
to provide for inspection of sources to ascertain compliance with 
applicable emission control action requirements, and provide for 
communications procedures for transmitting status reports and orders as 
to emission control actions to be taken during an episode stage. We are 
finalizing approval, as proposed, of these emergency episode 
contingency plans into the California SIP.
    Because of Lake County's attainment status for ozone, it meets the 
criteria of 40 CFR 51.152(d)(1) that permits the Administrator to 
exempt those portions of Priority I regions that have been designated 
as attainment under section 107 of the CAA. The mix of ozone precursor 
sources in Lake County, as well as the historical 1-hour ozone levels 
below 0.10 ppm make it unlikely that additional measures are needed to 
keep ozone pollution below the significant harm level of 0.6 ppm. We 
are finalizing approval, as proposed, of the request to exempt the Lake 
County AQMD from emergency episode contingency planning requirements of 
40 CFR 51.152.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference as described in the amendments to 40 CFR 
part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, 
these documents available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 
Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more 
information).

V. 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves, or conditionally approves, state plans 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 Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

[[Page 16536]]

     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 CAA; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects, using practical and legally permissible methods, 
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe 
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. 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 Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by June 1, 2021. 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, Ammonia, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 18, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(551) and (c)(552) 
to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (551) The following plan was submitted on October 1, 2018, by the 
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) California Air Resources Board.
    (1) California Infrastructure SIP Revision for the 0.070 parts per 
million Federal 8-Hour Ozone Standard, release date September 27, 2018, 
excluding Attachments 1, 3, and 4.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
    (552) The following plans were submitted on June 25, 2020, by the 
Governor's designee as an attachment to a letter dated June 16, 2020.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Amador Air District.
    (1) ``Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' dated August 26, 2019 and 
adopted, as Resolution No. 19-06, on October 15, 2019.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) ``San Luis Obispo County Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' 
adopted, as Resolution No. 2020-1, on January 22, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (C) Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District.
    (1) ``Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' adopted, as Resolution #2020-
01, on February 24, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (D) Tuolumne County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) ``Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' adopted, as Resolution No. 
32-20, on April 7, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (E) Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) ``Final Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' dated February 21, 2020 
and adopted, as Resolution No. 1APCD-2020-4, on April 7, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (F) Calaveras County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) ``Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' dated December 2019 and 
adopted, as Resolution No. 20200526r056, on May 26, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional materials. (A) Lake County Air Quality Management 
District.
    (1) ``Request for Exemption of the Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' 
adopted on April 7, 2020.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  52.220a amend table 1 in paragraph (c) by revising the 
entries for ``18700'' and ``18701'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220a  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

[[Page 16537]]

                            Table 1--EPA-Approved Statutes and State Regulations \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State                                Additional
         State  citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
18700............................  Basic rule and           12/31/2016  [INSERT Federal      Filed on December
                                    guide to conflict                    Register             17, 1976,
                                    of interest                          CITATION], 3/30/     effective upon
                                    regulations.                         2021.                filing, and last
                                                                                              amendment filed on
                                                                                              December 1, 2016,
                                                                                              operative December
                                                                                              31, 2016.
                                                                                              Previously
                                                                                              approved on 4/1/
                                                                                              2016, 81 FR 18766.
18701............................  Determining Whether       7/10/2015  [INSERT Federal      Filed on January
                                    a Financial Effect                   Register             22, 1976,
                                    Is Reasonably                        CITATION], 3/30/     effective February
                                    Foreseeable.                         2021.                21, 1976, and last
                                                                                              amendment filed on
                                                                                              July 10, 2015,
                                                                                              operative July 10,
                                                                                              2015. Previously
                                                                                              approved on 4/1/
                                                                                              2016, 81 FR 18766.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 1 lists EPA-approved California statutes and regulations incorporated by reference in the applicable
  SIP. Table 2 of paragraph (c) lists approved California test procedures, test methods and specifications that
  are cited in certain regulations listed in Table 1. Approved California statutes that are nonregulatory or
  quasi-regulatory are listed in paragraph (e).

* * * * *

0
4. Section 52.221 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  52.221  Classification of regions.

    The California plan was evaluated on the basis of the following 
classifications:

                                                                Table 1 to Sec.   52.221
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Pollutant
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Air quality control region                                                                                               Photochemical
                                                              Particulate       Sulfur oxides     Nitrogen dioxide   Carbon monoxide        oxidants
                                                                 matter                                                                  (hydrocarbons)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great Basin Valley Intrastate............................                  I                III                III                III                III
Lake County Intrastate...................................                 II                III                III                III                  I
Lake Tahoe Intrastate....................................                 II                III                III                  I                III
Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate......................                  I                III                III                  I                  I
Mountain Counties Intrastate.............................                 II                III                III                  I                  I
North Central Coast Intrastate...........................                 II                III                III                III                  I
North Coast Intrastate...................................                 II                III                III                III                III
Northeast Plateau Intrastate.............................                III                III                III                III                III
Sacramento Valley Intrastate.............................                 II                III                III                  I                  I
San Diego Intrastate.....................................                 II                III                III                  I                  I
San Francisco Bay Area Intrastate........................                 II                III                III                  I                  I
San Joaquin Valley Intrastate............................                 II                III                III                  I                  I
South Central Coast Intrastate...........................                III                III                III                III                  I
Southeast Desert Intrastate..............................                  I                III                III                III                  I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
5. Section 52.223 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.223  Approval status.

* * * * *
    (p) 2015 ozone NAAQS: The 2018 Infrastructure SIP, submitted on 
October 1, 2018, is partially disapproved for specific requirements of 
Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 
air pollution control districts (APCDs), air quality management 
districts (AQMDs), or air quality control regions (AQCRs) listed in 
this paragraph.
    (1) Mendocino County AQMD (for sources subject to a FIP, including 
cogeneration and resource recovery projects, projects with stack 
heights greater than 65 meters or that use ``dispersion techniques'' as 
defined in 51.100 (which are major sources or major modifications under 
52.21), and sources for which the EPA has issued permits under 52.21 
for which applications were received by July 31, 1985, only) for 
sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere with measures in any other 
state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, only), and 
(J).
    (2) North Coast Unified AQMD (PSD requirements for the regulation 
of PM2.5, PM2.5 precursors, condensable 
PM2.5, PM2.5 increments, and NOX as an 
ozone precursor, only) for sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere 
with measures in any other state to prevent significant deterioration 
of air quality, only), and (J).
    (3) Northern Sonoma County APCD (for sources subject to a FIP, 
including cogeneration and resource recovery projects, projects with 
stack heights greater than 65 meters or that use ``dispersion 
techniques'' as defined in 51.100 (which are major sources or major 
modifications under 52.21), and sources for which the EPA has issued 
permits under 52.21 for which applications were received by July 31, 
1985, only) for sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere with 
measures in any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air 
quality, only), and (J).

[[Page 16538]]

    (4) Sacramento Metro AQMD (for sources subject to a FIP, including 
cogeneration and resource recovery projects, projects with stack 
heights greater than 65 meters or that use ``dispersion techniques'' as 
defined in 51.100 (which are major sources or major modifications under 
52.21), and sources for which the EPA has issued permits under 52.21 
for which applications were received by July 31, 1985, only) for 
sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere with measures in any other 
state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, only), and 
(J).
    (5) All areas in California that are subject to the federal PSD 
program as provided in 40 CFR 52.270 for sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
(D)(i)(II) (interfere with measures in any other state to prevent 
significant deterioration of air quality, only), and (J), except for 
South Coast AQMD where the federal PSD program applies to all 
pollutants except greenhouse gases.
    (6) All areas in California that are subject to the federal PSD 
program as provided in 40 CFR 52.270 for sections 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) 
(with respect to section 126(a), only).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-06110 Filed 3-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P