Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145-0191
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; South Coast Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2012 Particulate Matter 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Posted Date: 2020-11-09T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 217 (Monday, November 9, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71264-71270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23033]

[[Page 71264]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145; FRL-10015-43-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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to approve or conditionally approve portions of a state 
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by California to address 
Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements for the 2006 and 2012 fine 
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air 
Basin (``South Coast'') PM2.5 nonattainment area. 
Specifically, the EPA is approving all but the contingency measure 
element of the submitted SIP revision as meeting all applicable 
Moderate area requirements for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, 
and conditionally approving the contingency measure element as meeting 
both the Moderate area contingency measure requirement for the 2012 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the Serious area contingency measure 
requirement for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, 
the EPA is approving 2019 and 2022 motor vehicle emissions budgets for 
use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2012 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is also reclassifying 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 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
based on the EPA's determination that the area cannot practicably 
attain the standard by the applicable Moderate area attainment date of 
December 31, 2021. As a consequence of this reclassification, 
California is required to submit a Serious area attainment plan that 
includes a demonstration of attainment of the 2012 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area as expeditiously as 
practicable and no later than December 31, 2025.

DATES: This rule will be effective on December 9, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance 
in a language other than English or if you are a person with 
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, 
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office 
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, 
(415) 972-3877, or by email at graham.ashleyr@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
    A. Moderate Area Planning Requirements
    B. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable 
Attainment Date
    C. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country
    D. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant 
correlations between elevated levels of PM2.5 (particulate 
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less) and premature mortality. 
Other important health effects associated with PM2.5 
exposure include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, 
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.\1\ 
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 compounds, and ammonia 
(``secondary PM2.5'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 78 FR 3086, 3088 (January 15, 2013).
    \2\ EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, No. EPA/
600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF, October 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA first established annual and 24-hour NAAQS for 
PM2.5 on July 18, 1997.\3\ The annual standard was set at 
15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) based on a 3-year 
average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and the 24-hour 
(daily) standard was set at 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on the 3-year 
average of the annual 98th percentile values of 24-hour 
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitor within an area.\4\ On 
October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 
the annual 98th percentile values of 24-hour concentrations.\5\ On 
January 15, 2013, the EPA revised the annual standard to 12.0 [micro]g/
m\3\ based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 
concentrations.\6\ We refer to this standard as the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 38652 (codified at 40 CFR 50.7).
    \4\ The primary and secondary standards were set at the same 
level for both the 24-hour and the annual PM2.5 
standards.
    \5\ 71 FR 61144.
    \6\ 78 FR 3086.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 area as nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS.\7\ The EPA classified the area as Moderate 
nonattainment on June 2, 2014 and reclassified it as Serious 
nonattainment for these NAAQS on January 13, 2016.\8\ On January 15, 
2015, the EPA designated and classified the South Coast area as 
Moderate nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\9\ The 
South Coast area is also designated and classified as Moderate

[[Page 71265]]

nonattainment for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 74 FR 58688 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
    \8\ 79 FR 31566 and 81 FR 1514. The EPA promulgated these 
PM2.5 nonattainment area classifications in response to a 
2013 decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanding 
the EPA's prior implementation rule for the PM2.5 NAAQS 
and directing the EPA to promulgate implementation rules pursuant to 
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act. Natural Resources Defense 
Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
    \9\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
    \10\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005) (codified at 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. On November 9, 2011, the EPA approved all but the 
contingency measures in the 2007 PM2.5 Plan (76 FR 
69928), and on October 29, 2013, the EPA approved a revised 
contingency measure SIP for the area (78 FR 64402). On July 25, 
2016, the EPA determined that the South Coast area had attained the 
1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 2011-2013 
monitoring data, suspending any remaining attainment-related 
planning requirements for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS in this area (81 FR 48350).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The local air district with primary responsibility for developing a 
plan to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area is 
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or 
``District''). The District works cooperatively with the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) in preparing these plans. Authority for 
regulating sources 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 and some categories of consumer products.
    On July 2, 2020, we proposed to approve or conditionally approve 
portions of a SIP revision submitted by California to address CAA 
requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast 
nonattainment area.\11\ The submitted SIP revision, the ``Final 2016 
Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017),'' was adopted by the SCAQMD 
Governing Board on March 3, 2017 and submitted by CARB to the EPA on 
April 27, 2017.\12\ We refer to those portions of this SIP submission 
that address the Serious area requirements for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate area requirements for the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS as the ``2016 PM2.5 Plan'' or 
``Plan.'' The EPA previously approved those portions of the 2016 
PM2.5 Plan that pertain to the requirements for implementing 
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, except for the contingency measure 
component of the Plan.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 85 FR 40026.
    \12\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive 
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA 
Region IX, with enclosures.
    \13\ 84 FR 3305 (February 12, 2019). As part of this action, the 
EPA found that, for purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area 
fails to make RFP under CAA sections 172(c)(9) was moot as applied 
to the 2017 milestone year because CARB and the District had 
demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones in 
the plan had been met. The EPA took no action with respect to the 
RFP contingency measures for the 2020 milestone year or attainment 
contingency measures for these NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of our July 2, 2020 action, we proposed to approve the 
following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the CAA 
Moderate area requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: The 
2012 base year emissions inventories, the reasonably available control 
measure/reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT) 
demonstration, the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area 
attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable, the reasonable 
further progress (RFP) demonstration, the quantitative milestones, the 
motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2019 and 2022, and SCAQMD's 
commitments to adopt and implement specific rules and measures to 
achieve emission reductions and to submit the rules and measures to 
CARB for transmittal to the EPA as a revision to the SIP. We also 
proposed to conditionally approve the contingency measure element of 
the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Serious area planning 
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate area 
planning requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Lastly, we 
proposed to reclassify the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment 
area, including reservation areas of Indian country, as Serious 
nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 85 FR 40026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the contingency measure requirement, in our 
proposed rule, we noted that the EPA's longstanding interpretation of 
section 172(c)(9) that states may rely on already-implemented measures 
as contingency measures (if they provide emissions reductions in excess 
of those needed to meet any other nonattainment plan requirements) was 
rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case referred to as 
Bahr v. EPA (``Bahr'').\15\ In Bahr, the Ninth Circuit concluded that 
contingency measures must be measures that would take effect at the 
time the area fails to make RFP or to attain by the applicable 
attainment date, not before.\16\ Thus, within the geographic 
jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, states cannot rely on already-
implemented control measures to comply with the contingency measure 
requirements under CAA sections 172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Bahr v. EPA, 836 F. 3d 1218, 1235-1237 (9th Cir. 2016).
    \16\ Id. at 1235-1237.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed conditional approval of the contingency measure 
element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan relied on specific 
commitments: (1) From the District to modify an existing rule, Rule 445 
(``Wood Burning Devices''), to lower the wood burning curtailment 
threshold upon any of the four EPA determinations (i.e., ``findings of 
failure'') listed in 40 CFR 51.1014(a); (2) from the District to submit 
the revised rule to CARB for transmittal to the EPA by the earlier of 
(a) one year from the date of the EPA's conditional approval of the 
contingency measures for the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard, or 
(b) 60 days after the date the EPA makes a determination that the South 
Coast area has failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
standards but no later than one year after the date of the EPA's 
conditional approval of the contingency measures for these standards; 
\17\ and (3) from CARB to submit the revised District rule to the EPA 
as a SIP revision by the earlier of these two dates.\18\ For more 
information about these submittals, please see our proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri, 
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, 
CARB.
    \18\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael T. Benjamin, 
Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Amy 
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX 
(transmitting letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri, 
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, 
CARB).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to reclassification, in the proposed rule, we 
explained that 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 EPA designated the South 
Coast area as nonattainment for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 
effective April 15, 2015.\19\ Therefore, as a result of our 
reclassification of the South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment 
area, the attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act for the 
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is as expeditiously as 
practicable but no later than December 31, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed rule also identified the Serious area attainment plan 
elements that California would, upon reclassification, have to submit 
to satisfy the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, 
including the requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the 
Act.\20\ The EPA explained that under section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the 
State must submit the required provisions to implement best available 
control measures (BACM), including best available control technology 
(BACT),\21\ no later than 18 months after

[[Page 71266]]

reclassification. Because an up-to-date emissions inventory serves as 
the foundation for a state's BACM and BACT determinations, the EPA 
proposed to also 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 requires evaluation of the 
precursor pollutants that must be controlled to provide for expeditious 
attainment in the area, the EPA proposed to require the State to submit 
any optional precursor insignificance demonstrations by this same date. 
The EPA proposed to require the State to submit the attainment 
demonstration required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and all other 
attainment-related plan elements for the South Coast area no later the 
end of the eighth calendar year after designation--i.e., by December 
31, 2023. We noted that although section 189(b)(2) generally provides 
for up to four years after a discretionary reclassification for the 
state to submit the required attainment demonstration, given the timing 
of the reclassification action less than two years before the Moderate 
area attainment date, it is appropriate in this case for the EPA to 
establish an earlier SIP submission deadline to assure timely 
implementation of the statutory requirements.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 85 FR 40026.
    \21\ The 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. 59 FR 41998, 42010 and 
42014 (August 16, 1994). 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. Id. at 42011-42012.
    \22\ Id. at 40054-40055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period 
that ended on August 3, 2020. During this period, the EPA received 
comments from three anonymous commenters.\23\ None of the comments 
received are relevant to the EPA's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The docket for this rulemaking contains these comment 
letters, with the exception of sixteen attachments to one comment 
letter that contain copyright and trademark claims. The EPA did not 
receive any comments regarding the impact of the Safer Affordable 
Fuel Efficient (SAFE) actions (84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019) and 
85 FR 24174 (April 30, 2020)) on the South Coast 2016 
PM2.5 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

A. Moderate Area Planning Requirements

    For the reasons discussed in detail in the proposed rule and 
summarized herein, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is taking final 
action to approve or conditionally approve portions of the 2016 
PM2.5 Plan submitted by the State of California. We are 
finalizing approval of the following elements of the 2016 
PM2.5 Plan as meeting the Moderate area requirements for the 
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS:
     The base year emissions inventories as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
     the RACM/RACT demonstration as meeting the requirements of 
CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C);
     the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area 
attainment date of December 31, 2021 is impracticable as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii);
     the RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
section 172(c)(2);
     the quantitative milestones as meeting the requirements of 
CAA section 189(c);
     the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2019 and 2022, 
because they are derived from an approvable RFP demonstration and meet 
the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A; 
\24\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ In our July 2, 2020 action, we proposed to limit the 
duration of our approval of the budgets in the 2016 PM2.5 
Plan to the period before the effective date of the EPA's adequacy 
finding for any subsequently submitted budgets per a request from 
CARB (85 FR 40026, 40053). We did not receive any comments on our 
proposal to limit the duration of the budgets and are finalizing our 
approval of the budgets for this limited period, as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     the SCAQMD's commitments to adopt and implement specific 
rules and measures in accordance with the schedule provided in Chapter 
4 of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to achieve the emission reductions 
shown therein, and to submit these rules and measures to CARB for 
transmittal to the EPA as a revision to the SIP, as stated on page 9 of 
SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 17-2.
    The EPA is also finalizing a conditional approval of the 
contingency measure element of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan as 
meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS and for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. We note 
that the EPA determined on September 16, 2020, that the South Coast 
area had failed to timely attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,\25\ 
and that CARB is required to submit specified revisions to Rule 445 
(``Wood Burning Devices'') as a SIP revision to the EPA no later than 
60 days after this date, consistent with the terms of its commitment 
under CAA section 110(k)(4).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 85 FR 57733 (September 16, 2020).
    \26\ Letter dated March 3, 2020, from Michael T. Benjamin, 
Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to Amy 
Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX 
(transmitting letter dated February 12, 2020, from Wayne Nastri, 
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, 
CARB).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable Attainment 
Date

    In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is taking 
final action to reclassify the South Coast area from Moderate to 
Serious nonattainment for the 2012 annual 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, 2021.
    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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS effective 
April 15, 2015.\27\ Therefore, as a result of our reclassification of 
the South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment area, section 188(c)(2) 
of the Act requires that the area attain the 2012 PM2.5 
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 
2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 80 FR 2206 (codified at 40 CFR 81.305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country

    When the South Coast area was designated nonattainment for the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS, five Indian tribes were located within the 
boundaries of the nonattainment area: The Cahuilla Band of Mission 
Indians of the Cahuilla Reservation, the Morongo Band of Mission 
Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, the San Manuel Band of Mission 
Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. At that time, the main 
body of land belonging to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians 
of the Pechanga Reservation was expressly excluded from the South Coast 
2012 PM2.5 nonattainment area. However, since designation, 
the tribe has acquired the Meadowbrook parcel, which is located 
approximately 30 miles northwest of the northern boundary of the 
Reservation and is located within the South Coast PM2.5 
nonattainment area.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 85 FR 40026, 40055.

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

[[Page 71267]]

    We have considered the relevance of our final action to reclassify 
the South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2012 
PM2.5 standard for each tribe located within the South Coast 
area. As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, we believe that 
the same facts and circumstances that support the reclassification for 
the non-Indian country lands also support reclassification for 
reservation areas of Indian country \29\ and any other areas of Indian 
country where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has 
jurisdiction located within the South Coast nonattainment area.\30\ In 
this final action, the EPA is therefore exercising its authority under 
CAA section 188(b)(1) to reclassify reservation areas of Indian country 
and any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a tribe has 
demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction 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 the EPA determines 
cannot practicably attain the relevant standard by the applicable 
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ ``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.''
    \30\ 85 FR 40026, 40055-40056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the considerations outlined above and in our proposed 
rulemaking 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 are finalizing our reclassification of the reservation areas of 
Indian country and any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a 
tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction within the South 
Coast nonattainment area to Serious for the 2012 PM2.5 
standard.
    Generally, the effect of reclassification is to lower the 
applicable ``major source'' emissions thresholds for direct 
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for purposes of the 
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program and the Title V 
operating permit program from 100 tpy to 70 tpy,\31\ thus subjecting 
more new or modified stationary sources to these requirements. 
Reclassification also lowers the de minimis threshold under the CAA's 
General Conformity requirements from 100 tpy to 70 tpy.\32\ In this 
case, however, reclassification does not change the ``major source'' 
thresholds because, as a result of the EPA's January 2016 
reclassification of the South Coast area as a ``Serious'' nonattainment 
area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the area is already subject 
to the 70 tpy major source threshold for Serious PM2.5 
nonattainment areas in CAA section 189(b)(3).\33\ Likewise, 
reclassification does not affect the applicable General Conformity de 
minimis thresholds, because the South Coast area is already subject to 
the 70 tpy de minimis threshold for PM2.5 and all 
PM2.5 precursors as a result of the EPA's previous 
reclassification of the area as Serious for the 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B).
    \32\ 40 CFR part 93, subpart B.
    \33\ 81 FR 1514 (January 13, 2016).
    \34\ Id. and 40 CFR 93.153(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA contacted tribal officials early in the process of 
developing this action to provide time for tribal officials to have 
meaningful and timely input into its development.\35\ On March 12, 
2020, during two separate conference calls, the EPA participated in 
formal consultation with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians and staff-
level consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of 
the Pechanga Reservation, following requests from these tribes. During 
these calls, EPA staff presented information about the nonattainment 
designation for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast area 
and about the SCAQMD's request, and EPA and tribal representatives 
together discussed the tribe's questions about the implications of the 
request for each tribe. At the close of each call, the tribes indicated 
that they had no further questions and the Morongo Band of Mission 
Indians later requested that the EPA close formal consultation. On 
April 30, 2020, the EPA sent a letter to the Morongo Band of Mission 
Indians closing formal consultation.\36\ No other Indian tribe has 
expressed an interest in discussing this action with the EPA. A summary 
of the tribal consultation is included in the docket for this 
action.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, the EPA 
sent letters to tribal officials inviting government-to-government 
consultation. These letters can be found in the docket.
    \36\ Letter dated April 30, 2020, from Elizabeth Adams, 
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Robert 
Martin, Tribal Chairman, Morongo Band of Mission Indians.
    \37\ Memo dated April 14, 2020, from Ashley Graham, Air Planning 
Office, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Docket No. 
EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0145.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We notified tribal officials when the proposed action published in 
the Federal Register and continue to invite Indian tribes in the South 
Coast to contact the EPA with any questions about the effects of this 
reclassification on tribal interests and air quality. 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 as a result of this reclassification.

D. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements

    As a consequence of our reclassification of the South Coast area as 
a Serious nonattainment area for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, 
California is 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 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 
that California is required to submit are as follows:
    1. Provisions to assure that BACM, including BACT for stationary 
sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and 
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than four 
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, 2025, or where the state is seeking an extension of 
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that 
attainment by December 31, 2025 is impracticable and that the plan 
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date 
practicable and no later than December 31, 2030 (CAA sections 
189(b)(1)(A), 188(c)(2), and 188(e));
    3. Plan provisions that require RFP (CAA 172(c)(2));
    4. Quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every three 
years until the area is redesignated attainment and that 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 sources of PM2.5 and all PM2.5 
precursors in the area (CAA 172(c)(3));

[[Page 71268]]

    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 NNSR program to lower the applicable ``major 
stationary source'' \38\ thresholds from 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA section 
189(b)(3)) and to satisfy the subpart 4 control requirements for major 
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 
189(e)).\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ For 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 tpy of PM10 (CAA 
sections 189(b)(3)).
    \39\ As discussed in our proposed rule, California submitted 
NNSR SIP revisions for the South Coast to address the subpart 4 NNSR 
requirements for Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas on May 
8, 2017, and the EPA conditionally approved these NNSR SIP revisions 
on November 30, 2018 (83 FR 61551). The State fulfilled the 
commitment that provided the basis for the EPA's conditional 
approval of these NNSR SIP revisions by submitting a revised version 
of Rule 1325 (``Federal PM2.5 New Source Review 
Program'') on April 24, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above in Section I, section 189(b)(2) of the CAA 
requires a state to submit the required BACM provisions no later than 
18 months after the effective date of final reclassification. Because 
an effective BACM evaluation requires an up-to-date emissions inventory 
and an evaluation of the precursor pollutants that must be controlled 
to provide for expeditious attainment in the area, we are also 
requiring the State to submit the emissions inventory required under 
CAA section 172(c)(3) and any optional precursor insignificance 
demonstrations by this same date. Although section 189(b)(2) generally 
provides for up to four years after a discretionary reclassification 
for the state to submit the required attainment demonstration, given 
the timing of the reclassification action less than two years before 
the Moderate area attainment date, we are establishing a deadline of 
December 31, 2023 for the State to submit the attainment demonstration 
required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and all other attainment related 
plan elements for the South Coast area.
    We note that the 2016 PM2.5 Plan submitted on April 27, 
2017, includes a Serious area attainment demonstration, an emissions 
inventory, attainment-related plan elements, and BACM/BACT provisions, 
which the EPA intends to evaluate and act on through subsequent 
rulemakings, as appropriate.

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, 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.);
     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 January 8, 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

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.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate 
matter.

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

    Dated: October 10, 2020.
John Busterud,
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:

[[Page 71269]]

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(517)(ii)(B)(7) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (517) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) * * *
    (7) The following portions of the ``Final 2016 Air Quality 
Management Plan (March 2017),'' adopted March 3, 2017: Chapter 5 
(``PM2.5 Modeling Approach''), pages 5-17 through 5-27; 
Appendix III (``Base and Future Year Emission Inventory''), Attachment 
A (``Annual Average Emissions by Source Category in South Coast Air 
Basin'') for PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and 
NH3 for years 2012, 2019, 2021, and 2022, and Attachment D, 
tables D-1, D-7, D-11, and D-13; Appendix IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary 
and Mobile Source Control Measures''), Table IV-A-4 and Section 2 
(``PM2.5 Control Measures''); Appendix IV-C (``Regional 
Transportation Strategy and Control Measures''), Section III 
(``Reasonably Available Control Measure Analysis''); Appendix V 
(``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration''), Chapter 6 (``Annual 
PM2.5 Attainment Demonstration'') and Attachment 7 (``Annual 
Unmonitored Area Analysis Supplement''); Appendix VI-A (``Reasonably 
Available Control Measures (RACM)/Best Available Control Measures 
(BACM) Demonstration''), pages VI-A-5 through VI-A-11, pages VI-A-22 
through VI-A-32, pages VI-A-36 through VI-A-38, Attachment VI-A-1 
(``Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations''), Attachment VI-A-2 
(``Control Measure Assessment''), and Attachment VI-A-3 (``California 
Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control Measures/
Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment''); Appendix VI-B 
(``Impracticability Demonstration for Request for ``Serious'' 
Classification for 2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard''; Appendix 
VI-C (``Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestone Years''), pages 
VI-C-5 through VI-C-14, and Attachment VI-C-1 (``California Existing 
Mobile Source Control Program''); Appendix VI-D (``General Conformity 
and Transportation Conformity Budget''), pages VI-D-2 through VI-D-4, 
excluding tables VI-D-1 and VI-D-2; and Appendix VI-F (``PM Precursor 
Requirements'').
* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.248 is amended by adding paragraph (k) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.248  Identification of plan--conditional approval.

* * * * *
    (k) The EPA is conditionally approving the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the South Coast with respect to the 
contingency measure requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) for both the 
Serious area plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Moderate 
area plan for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The conditional approval 
is based on a commitment from the South Coast Air Quality Management 
District (District) in a letter dated February 12, 2020, to adopt 
specific rule revisions, and a commitment from the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) dated March 3, 2020, to submit the amended 
District rule to the EPA by the earlier of one year after the date of 
the EPA's conditional approval of the contingency measures for the 2012 
annual PM2.5 standard, or 60 days after the date the EPA 
determines that the South Coast area has failed to attain the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 standards but no later than one year after the 
date of the EPA's conditional approval of the contingency measures for 
these standards. The EPA determined on September 16, 2020, that the 
South Coast area had failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
standards. Therefore, CARB must submit the amended District rule to the 
EPA by November 16, 2020. If the District or CARB fail to meet their 
commitments, the conditional approval is treated as a disapproval.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
5. In Sec.  81.305, amend the table ``California--2012 Annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary],'' by revising the entries under ``Los 
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, CA'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.305  California.

* * * * *

                                       California--2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                                    [Primary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Designation                           Classification
       Designated area \1\       -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \2\              Type              Date \2\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles-South Coast Air
 Basin, CA:
    Los Angeles County (part)...  ..................  Nonattainment.....  December 9, 2020..  Serious.

[[Page 71270]]

 
That portion of Los Angeles
 County which lies south and
 west of a line described as
 follows: Beginning at the Los
 Angeles-San Bernardino County
 boundary and running west along
 the Township line common to
 Township 3 North and Township 2
 North, San Bernardino Base and
 Meridian; then north along the
 range line common to Range 8
 West and Range 9 West; then
 west along the Township line
 common to Township 4 North and
 Township 3 North; then north
 along the range line common to
 Range 12 West and Range 13 West
 to the southeast corner of
 Section 12, Township 5 North
 and Range 13 West; then west
 along the south boundaries of
 Sections 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, and
 7, Township 5 North and Range
 13 West to the boundary of the
 Angeles National Forest which
 is collinear with the range
 line common to Range 13 West
 and Range 14 West; then north
 and west along the Angeles
 National Forest boundary to the
 point of intersection with the
 Township line common to
 Township 7 North and Township 6
 North (point is at the
 northwest corner of Section 4
 in Township 6 North and Range
 14 West); then west along the
 Township line common to
 Township 7 North and Township 6
 North; then north along the
 range line common to Range 15
 West and Range 16 West to the
 southeast corner of Section 13,
 Township 7 North and Range 16
 West; then along the south
 boundaries of Sections 13, 14,
 15, 16, 17, and 18, Township 7
 North and Range 16 West; then
 north along the range line
 common to Range 16 West and
 Range 17 West to the north
 boundary of the Angeles
 National Forest (collinear with
 the Township line common to
 Township 8 North and Township 7
 North); then west and north
 along the Angeles National
 Forest boundary to the point of
 intersection with the south
 boundary of the Rancho La
 Liebre Land Grant; then west
 and north along this land grant
 boundary to the Los Angeles-
 Kern County boundary.
    Orange County...............  ..................  Nonattainment.....  December 9, 2020..  Serious.
    Riverside County (part).....  ..................  Nonattainment.....  December 9, 2020..  Serious.
That portion of Riverside County
 which lies to the west of a
 line described as follows:
 Beginning at the Riverside-San
 Diego County boundary and
 running north along the range
 line common to Range 4 East and
 Range 3 East, San Bernardino
 Base and Meridian; then east
 along the Township line common
 to Township 8 South and
 Township 7 South; then north
 along the range line common to
 Range 5 East and Range 4 East;
 then west along the Township
 line common to Township 6 South
 and Township 7 South to the
 southwest corner of Section 34,
 Township 6 South, Range 4 East;
 then north along the west
 boundaries of Sections 34, 27,
 22, 15, 10, and 3, Township 6
 South, Range 4 East; then west
 along the Township line common
 to Township 5 South and
 Township 6 South; then north
 along the range line common to
 Range 4 East and Range 3 East;
 then west along the south
 boundaries of Sections 13, 14,
 15, 16, 17, and 18, Township 5
 South, Range 3 East; then north
 along the range line common to
 Range 2 East and Range 3 East;
 to the Riverside-San Bernardino
 County line.
    San Bernardino County (part)  ..................  Nonattainment.....  December 9, 2020..  Serious.
That portion of San Bernardino
 County which lies south and
 west of a line described as
 follows: Beginning at the San
 Bernardino-Riverside County
 boundary and running north
 along the range line common to
 Range 3 East and Range 2 East,
 San Bernardino Base and
 Meridian; then west along the
 Township line common to
 Township 3 North and Township 2
 North to the San Bernardino-Los
 Angeles County boundary.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes areas of Indian country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\2\ This date is April 15, 2015, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-23033 Filed 11-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P