Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0737-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District
Posted Date: 2017-12-27T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61203-61205]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27950]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0737; FRL-9972-57-Region 9]

Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Northern Sierra Air 
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management 
District (NSAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). This revision concerns emissions of particulate matter (PM) from 
wood burning devices. We are proposing to approve a local measure to 
reduce emissions from these emission sources under the Clean Air Act 
(CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to 
follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 26, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2017-0737 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Doris Lo, 
at [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full 
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia 
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please 
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What measure did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this measure?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted measure?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the measure?
    B. Does the measure meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What measure did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the measure addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                           Table 1--Submitted Measure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency              Resolution No.        Measure title            Adopted         Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSAQMD............................         2017-01   Northern Sierra Air              01/23/17         02/28/17
                                                      Quality Management
                                                      District Resolution
                                                      #2017-01.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 28, 2017, the submittal for the NSAQMD measure was deemed 
by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this measure?

    There are no previous versions of the NSAQMD measure in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted measure?

    Particulate matter, including PM with diameters that are generally 
2.5 microns or smaller (PM2.5) and PM with diameters that 
are generally 10 microns or smaller (PM10), contributes to 
effects that are harmful to human health and

[[Page 61204]]

the environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of 
respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, 
visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 
110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control PM 
emissions.
    On January 15, 2013, the EPA revised the National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5 to provide increased 
protection of public health by lowering the level of the annual 
standards from 15 to 12 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) (40 
CFR 50.18). Effective April 15, 2015, the EPA designated and classified 
the Plumas County nonattainment area (NAA) as moderate nonattainment 
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 81.305; 80 FR 2206, 2218). 
CARB submitted the NSAQMD measure on February 28, 2017, as part of an 
attainment plan to address nonattainment area SIP requirements for the 
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Plumas County NAA.
    The submitted measure is an enforceable commitment by the NSAQMD to 
implement a woodstove change-out incentive program during the 2016-2022 
timeframe in accordance with specific program requirements that are 
designed to achieve quantifiable, surplus, enforceable, and permanent 
PM2.5 emission reductions in the Plumas County NAA. The 
program requirements ensure, among other things, that older, dirtier 
wood stoves currently in operation in the Plumas County NAA will be 
replaced with EPA-certified wood stoves or other less-polluting 
devices. The woodstove change-out program is funded by the EPA's 2015 
Targeted Air Shed Grant Program, the NSAQMD, and other agencies and is 
the primary control strategy in California's attainment plan for the 
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Plumas County NAA.
    The enforceable commitment obligates the NSAQMD to achieve specific 
amounts of PM2.5 emission reductions through implementation 
of the woodstove change-out program by specific years, to submit annual 
reports to the EPA detailing its implementation of the program and the 
projected emission reductions, and to adopt and submit substitute 
measures by specific dates if the EPA determines that the woodstove 
change-out program will not achieve the necessary emission reductions. 
The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about 
this measure.
    We intend to evaluate California's PM2.5 attainment plan 
for the Plumas County NAA as a whole through a subsequent notice-and-
comment rulemaking action.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the measure?

    Generally, SIP control measures must be enforceable (see CAA 
section 110(a)(2)), must not interfere with applicable requirements 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA 
requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP 
control requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent 
or greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193).
    The CAA explicitly provides for the use of economic incentive 
programs (EIPs) as one tool for states to use to achieve attainment of 
the NAAQS (see, e.g., CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), 172(c)(6), and 
183(e)(4)). EIPs use market-based strategies to encourage the reduction 
of emissions from stationary, area, and mobile sources in an efficient 
manner. EPA has promulgated regulations for statutory EIPs required 
under section 182(g) of the Act and has issued guidance for 
discretionary EIPs (see 59 FR 16690 (April 7, 1994), codified at 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart U and U.S. EPA, ``Improving Air Quality with Economic 
Incentive Programs,'' January 2001 (``2001 EIP Guidance'')).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``discretionary economic incentive program'' is ``any EIP 
submitted to the EPA as an implementation plan revision for purposes 
other than to comply with the statutory requirements of sections 
182(g)(3), 182(g)(5), 187(d)(3), or 187(g) of the Act.'' 40 CFR 
51.491.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's guidance documents addressing EIPs and other nontraditional 
programs provide for some flexibility in meeting established SIP 
requirements for enforceability and quantification of emission 
reductions, provided the State takes clear responsibility for ensuring 
that the emission reductions necessary to meet applicable CAA 
requirements are achieved. Accordingly, EPA has consistently stated 
that nontraditional emission reduction measures submitted to satisfy 
SIP requirements under the Act must be accompanied by appropriate 
``enforceable commitments'' from the State to monitor emission 
reductions achieved and to rectify shortfalls in a timely manner (see, 
e.g., U.S. EPA, ``Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measures in a 
State Implementation Plan (SIP),'' September 2004 (``2004 Emerging and 
Voluntary Measures Guidance'') at pages 8-12 and U.S. EPA, ``Guidance 
for Quantifying and Using Emission Reductions from Voluntary Woodstove 
Changeout Programs in State Implementation Plans,'' January 2006 
(``2006 Woodstove Guidance'') at page 7). The EPA has also consistently 
stated that, where a State intends to rely on a nontraditional program 
to satisfy CAA requirements, the State must demonstrate that the 
program achieves emission reductions that are quantifiable, surplus, 
enforceable, and permanent (see, e.g., 2001 EIP Guidance at Section 4.1 
and 2006 Woodstove Guidance at 3-4).
    Guidance documents that we use to evaluate discretionary EIPs and 
other nontraditional emission reduction programs include the following:
     ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs'' 
January 2001 (EPA-452/R-01-001) (``2001 EIP Guidance'').
     ``Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measure in a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP),'' Stephen D. Page, OAQPS, October 4, 2004 
(``2004 Emerging and Voluntary Measures Guidance'').
     ``Guidance on Incorporating Bundled Measures in a State 
Implementation Plan,'' Stephen D. Page, OAQPS, and Margo Oge, OTAQ, 
August 16, 2005 (``2005 Bundled Measures Guidance'').
     ``Guidance for Quantifying and Using Emission Reductions 
from Voluntary Woodstove Changeout Programs in State Implementation 
Plans,'' January 2006 (EPA-456/B-06-001) (``2006 Woodstove Guidance'').

B. Does the measure meet the evaluation criteria?

    The submitted commitment contains clear, nondiscretionary and 
mandatory obligations that are enforceable against the NSAQMD and 
ensure that information about the emission reductions achieved through 
the woodstove change-out program will be readily available to the 
public through the NSAQMD's submission of annual reports to the EPA. 
Our approval of this commitment would make these obligations 
enforceable by the EPA and by citizens under the CAA. The commitment 
obligates the District to implement a new program that achieves 
quantifiable, surplus, permanent, and enforceable PM2.5 
emission reductions and does not alter any existing SIP requirements. 
Our approval of the commitment into the SIP would strengthen the SIP 
and would not interfere with applicable requirements concerning 
attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements, 
consistent with the requirements of CAA section 110(l). Section 193 of 
the CAA does not apply

[[Page 61205]]

to this action because this measure does not modify any SIP control 
requirement that was in effect before November 15, 1990.
    We are proposing to find that the submitted measure satisfies CAA 
requirements for enforceability, SIP revisions, and nontraditional 
emission reduction programs as interpreted in EPA guidance documents. 
The TSD contains more information on our evaluation of this measure.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted measure under CAA 
section 110(k)(3) based on a conclusion that the measure satisfies all 
applicable requirements. We will accept comments from the public on 
this proposal until January 26, 2018. If we take final action to 
approve the submitted measure, our final action will incorporate this 
measure into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the NSAQMD measure described in Table 1 of this preamble. The 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials 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).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law 
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 
proposed 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.);
     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 the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: December 14, 2017.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-27950 Filed 12-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P