
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 202 (Tuesday, October 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63639-63662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26315]



[[Page 63639]]

Vol. 80

Tuesday,

No. 202

October 20, 2015

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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





40 CFR Parts 52 and 81





Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas 
for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast Moderate 
Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS; Proposed Rule

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

[[Page 63640]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0204; FRL-9935-61-Region 9]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Designation of 
Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; South Coast 
Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment for 
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by 
California to address Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requirements for the 
2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the Los Angeles-South Coast 
Air Basin (South Coast) Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area. 
These SIP revisions are the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, submitted 
February 13, 2013, and the 2015 Supplement, submitted March 4, 2015. 
The EPA is also proposing to reclassify the South Coast 
PM2.5 nonattainment area, including reservation areas of 
Indian Country and any other area of Indian Country within it where the 
EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction, as a 
Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS based on 
EPA's determination that the area cannot practicably attain this 
standard by the applicable Moderate area attainment date of December 
31, 2015. Upon final reclassification as a Serious area, California 
will be required to submit a Serious area plan including a 
demonstration that the plan provides for attainment of the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable Serious area attainment date, 
which is no later than December 31, 2019, or by the most expeditious 
alternative date practicable, in accordance with the requirements of 
part D of Title I of the CAA.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by November 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2015-0204, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
     Email: tax.wienke@epa.gov.
     Mail or deliver: Wienke Tax, Office of Air Planning (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, 
San Francisco, CA 94105.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, 
including any personal information provided, unless the comment 
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as 
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, and 
the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to 
the EPA, your email address will be automatically captured and included 
as part of the public comment. If the EPA cannot read your comments due 
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 
EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket (docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2015-
0204) for this proposed rule is available electronically on the 
www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105. While all documents 
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly 
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), 
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI). 
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment 
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (415) 947-4192, 
tax.wienke@epa.gov

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

Table of Contents

I. Background for Proposed Actions
II. Clean Air Act Requirements for Moderate PM2.5 
Nonattainment Area Plans
III. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements for SIP Submittals
IV. Review of the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    A. Emissions Inventory
    B. Air Quality Modeling
    C. PM2.5 Precursors
    D. Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available 
Control Technology
    E. Major Stationary Source Control Requirements Under CAA 
Section 189(e)
    F. Adopted Control Strategy
    G. Demonstration that Attainment by the Moderate Area Attainment 
Date is Impracticable
    H. Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative Milestones
    I. Contingency Measures
    J. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
    K. General Conformity Budgets
V. Proposed Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Serious 
Area SIP Requirements
VI. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country
VII. Summary of Proposed Actions and Request for Public Comment
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background for Proposed Actions

    On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour national ambient 
air quality standards (NAAQS or standard) for PM2.5, 
particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less, to provide 
increased protection of public health by lowering its level from 65 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ (40 CFR 
50.13).\1\ Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant 
correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature 
mortality. Other important health effects associated with 
PM2.5 exposure include aggravation of respiratory and 
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions, 
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted 
activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory 
symptoms. Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5 
exposure include older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and 
children (78 FR 3086 at 3088, January 15, 2013). PM2.5 can 
be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a solid or liquid particle 
(``primary PM2.5'' or ``direct PM2.5'') or can be 
formed in the atmosphere as a result of various chemical reactions 
among precursor pollutants such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, 
volatile organic

[[Page 63641]]

compounds, and ammonia (``secondary PM2.5'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 71 FR 61224 (October 17, 2006). The EPA set the first 
NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), including 
annual standards of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations and 24-hour (daily) 
standards of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 98th 
percentile 24-hour concentrations (40 CFR 50.7). In 2012, the EPA 
revised the annual standard to lower its level to 12 [micro]g/m\3\ 
(78 FR 3086, January 15, 2013, codified at 40 CFR 50.18). Unless 
otherwise noted, all references to the PM2.5 standard in 
this notice are to the 2006 24-hour standard of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ 
codified at 40 CFR 50.13.
    \2\ See EPA, Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Revisions 
to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter 
(EPA-452/R-12-005, December 2012), p. 2-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is 
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation 
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, the EPA 
designated the South Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 standard of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ (74 FR 58688, November 
13, 2009). This designation became effective on December 14, 2009 (40 
CFR 81.305). The South Coast area is also designated nonattainment for 
the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards.\3\ On June 2, 
2014, the EPA classified the South Coast area as Moderate nonattainment 
for both the 1997 PM2.5 standards and the 2006 
PM2.5 standard under subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act 
(79 FR 31566).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005) and 40 CFR 81.305. In 
November 2007, California submitted the 2007 PM2.5 Plan 
to provide for attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in 
the South Coast. In November 2011, the EPA approved all but the 
contingency measures in the 2007 PM2.5 Plan (76 FR 69928, 
November 9, 2011). In November 2011 and April 2013, the State 
submitted a revised contingency measure plan, which the EPA approved 
on October 29, 2013 (78 FR 64402, October 29, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area is home to 
about 17 million people, has a diverse economic base, and contains one 
of the highest-volume port areas in the world. For a precise 
description of the geographic boundaries of the South Coast 
PM2.5 nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
    Ambient PM2.5 levels in the South Coast have declined 
considerably in the past 15 years to levels just above the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS. For the 2011-2013 period, the 24-hour 
PM2.5 design value for the area, based on monitored readings 
at the Mira Loma monitor, is 36 ug/m3.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See EPA, Air Quality System Report dated September 28, 2015 
in the docket for today's action. ``Design value'' means the 
calculated concentration according to the applicable appendix of 40 
CFR part 50 for the highest site in an attainment or nonattainment 
area (40 CFR 58.1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The local air district with primary responsibility for developing a 
plan to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is the 
South Coast Air Quality Management District (District or SCAQMD). The 
District works cooperatively with the California Air Resources Board 
(CARB) in preparing these plans. Authority for regulating sources under 
state jurisdiction in the South Coast is split between the District, 
which has responsibility for regulating stationary and most area 
sources, and CARB, which has responsibility for regulating most mobile 
sources.

II. Clean Air Act Requirements for PM2.5 Moderate 
Nonattainment Area Plans

    In April 2007, the EPA issued the Clean Air Fine Particle 
Implementation Rule (``2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule'') to 
assist states with the development of SIPs to meet the Act's attainment 
planning requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 standards (72 FR 
20583, April 25, 2007, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z). This 
rule was premised on the EPA's prior interpretation of the Act as 
allowing for implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS solely 
pursuant to the general nonattainment area provisions in subpart 1 of 
part D, title I of the CAA (``subpart 1'') and not the more specific 
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas in subpart 4 of 
part D, title I of the Act (``subpart 4''). Among other things, the 
2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule included nationally-
applicable presumptions regarding the need to evaluate and potentially 
control emissions of certain PM2.5 precursors.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002(c), the EPA provided, among 
other things, that a state was ``not required to address VOC [and 
ammonia] as . . . PM2.5 attainment plan precursor[s] and 
to evaluate sources of VOC [and ammonia] emissions in the State for 
control measures,'' unless the State or the EPA provided an 
appropriate technical demonstration showing that emissions from 
sources of these pollutants ``significantly contribute'' to 
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area (40 CFR 
51.1002(c)(3) and (4) and 72 FR 20586 at 20589-97 (April 25, 2007)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In March of 2012, the EPA issued a guidance document to aid states 
in preparing SIPs to meet the Act's attainment planning requirements 
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard.\6\ The 2012 guidance 
was based, in large part, on the requirements in the 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule, which the EPA based solely upon 
the statutory requirements of subpart 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum, dated March 2, 2012 (withdrawn June 6, 
2013), from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, to EPA Regional Air Directors, Regions I-X 
re: ``Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)'' 
(``2012 Guidance'') Available at: http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_guide.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    California had three years from the December 14, 2009 effective 
date of the South Coast's designation as nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 standard to submit a SIP for the South Coast that 
addressed the applicable requirements of the Act.\7\ On December 19, 
2012, the District adopted the Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan 
(AQMP), which addressed attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, 
among other CAA requirements. We refer herein to the portions of the 
2012 AQMP that address attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as 
the ``2012 PM2.5 Plan.'' On January 25, 2013, CARB adopted 
the 2012 PM2.5 Plan as an element of the California SIP and 
submitted it to the EPA on February 13, 2013.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See CAA section 172(b) and 40 CFR 51.1002(a).
    \8\ See letter dated February 13, 2013, from James N. Goldstene, 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 
Administrator, EPA Region 9,, with attachments, and CARB Board 
Resolution 13-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 4, 2013, several weeks after the District's adoption of 
the Plan, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit issued its 
decision in a challenge to the EPA's 2007 PM2.5 
Implementation Rule (NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013)). In 
NRDC, the court held that the EPA erred in implementing the 1997 
PM2.5 standards solely pursuant to the general 
implementation requirements of subpart 1, without also considering the 
requirements specific to particulate matter nonattainment areas in 
subpart 4.\9\ The court reasoned that the plain meaning of the CAA 
requires implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 standards under 
subpart 4 because PM2.5 particles fall within the statutory 
definition of PM10 and are thus subject to the same 
statutory requirements as PM10. The court remanded the 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule in its entirety, including the 
presumptions concerning VOC and ammonia in 40 CFR 51.1002, and 
instructed the EPA ``to repromulgate these rules pursuant to Subpart 4 
consistent with this opinion.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The NRDC decision also remanded the EPA's 2008 final rule to 
implement the nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permitting 
requirements for PM2.5 (73 FR 28231, May 16, 2008) which, 
like the 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, was premised on 
the requirements of subpart 1. Today's proposal does not address 
requirements for NNSR programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the NRDC decision, on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), 
the EPA published a final rule classifying all areas currently 
designated nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006 PM2.5 
standards as ``Moderate'' under subpart 4 and establishing a deadline 
of December 31, 2014 for states to submit any attainment-related and 
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) SIP elements required for these 
areas pursuant to subpart 4. The EPA provided its rationale for these 
actions in both the proposed and final classification/deadline 
rule.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 79 FR 69806, 69809 (November 21, 2013) and 79 FR 31566, 
31568 (June 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 6, 2015, the District adopted the ``Supplement to the 
24-Hour PM2.5 State Implementation Plan for the South Coast 
Air Basin'' (``2015

[[Page 63642]]

Supplement'' or ``Supplement'') as a revision to the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan. The District adopted the Supplement to address 
subpart 4 requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 standard to the 
extent that these requirements were not adequately addressed in the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan. CARB submitted the Supplement to the EPA on 
March 4, 2015. The Supplement includes information on the 
implementation of reasonably available controls for ammonia sources in 
the South Coast and the District's demonstration that the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement satisfy the requirements of 
subpart 4. As a consequence of the NRDC decision, we are reviewing the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement for compliance with the 
applicable requirements of both subpart 1 and subpart 4.
    The EPA provided its preliminary views on the CAA's requirements 
for particulate matter plans under part D, title I of the Act in 
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation 
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498, 
April 16, 1992) (``General Preamble'') and ``State Implementation Plans 
for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for 
PM-10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble 
for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 
1990'' (59 FR 41998, August 16, 1994) (``Addendum''). The General 
Preamble at 13538 discusses the relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 
SIP requirements, and notes that attainment plans for moderate 
nonattainment areas must meet the general provisions in subpart 1 to 
the extent that these provisions are not otherwise ``subsumed by, or 
integrally related to, the more specific [subpart 4] requirements.'' 
Some subpart 1 provisions have no subpart 4 equivalent (e.g., the 
emission inventories (CAA section 172(c)(3)) and contingency measures 
(CAA section 172(c)(9)) and for these provisions, subpart 1 continues 
to govern. Other provisions of subpart 1 are subsumed or superseded by 
more specific requirements in subpart 4 (e.g., certain provisions 
concerning attainment dates).
    Additionally, in a proposed rule published March 23, 2015 (80 FR 
15340), the EPA provided further interpretive guidance on the statutory 
SIP requirements that apply to areas designated nonattainment for the 
PM2.5 standards (hereafter ``Proposed PM2.5 
Implementation Rule''). We discuss these preliminary interpretations of 
the Act as appropriate in our evaluation of the 2012 PM2.5 
Plan and 2015 Supplement in section IV of this proposed rule.

III. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements for SIP Submittals

    We are proposing action on two California SIP submittals. The first 
is the ``2012 PM2.5 Plan,'' submitted on February 13, 2013, 
and the second is the 2015 Supplement, submitted on March 4, 
2015.11 12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See footnote 8.
    \12\ See Letter dated March 4, 2015 from Richard W. Corey, 
Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared 
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator EPA Region 9, with attachments, 
and CARB Resolution 15-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require each state to 
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing 
prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet 
this requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that 
adequate public notice was given and an opportunity for a public 
hearing was provided consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations 
in 40 CFR 51.102.
    Both the District and CARB satisfied applicable statutory and 
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior 
to adoption and submittal of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 
District conducted public workshops, provided public comment periods, 
and held a public hearing prior to the adoption of the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan on December 7, 2012.\13\ CARB provided the 
required public notice and opportunity for public comment prior to its 
January 25, 2013 public hearing on the 2012 PM2.5 Plan.\14\ 
The SIP submittal includes proof of publication of notices for these 
public hearings. We find, therefore, that the 2012 PM2.5 
Plan meets the procedural requirements for public notice and hearing in 
CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Public hearing notices, 
SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 12-19, ``A Resolution of the South 
Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD or District) Governing 
Board Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for 
the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), adopting the Draft 
final 2012 AQMP, to be referred to after Adoption as the Final 2012 
AQMP, and to be submitted into the California State Implementation 
Plan,'' December 7, 2012.
    \14\ See CARB Resolution 13-3, ``South Coast Air Basin 2012 
PM2.5 and Ozone State Implementation Plans,'' January 25, 
2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The District adopted the 2015 Supplement after reasonable public 
notice and hearing.\15\ CARB adopted the Supplement for submittal as a 
SIP revision at its February 19, 2015 Board meeting after reasonable 
public notice.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice of Public Hearing to Adopt Supplemental Document 
to the 2012 PM2.5 Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 Standard.
    \16\ See CARB, Notice of Public Meeting to Consider a Minor 
Revision to the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 State 
Implementation Plan, and CARB Board Resolution 15-2, February 19, 
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the EPA to determine whether a 
SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section also 
provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively determined to 
be complete or incomplete will become complete by operation of law six 
months after the date of submittal. The EPA's SIP completeness criteria 
are found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. A completeness review allows 
us to determine if the submittal includes all the necessary items and 
information we need to evaluate and act on it for substantive 
compliance with applicable requirements.
    The February 13, 2013 submittal of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
became complete by operation of law on August 13, 2014. The 2015 
Supplement became complete by operation of law on September 4, 2015 
(see our Technical Support Document (TSD) at section I.B).

IV. Review of the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement

    We summarize our evaluation of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 
2015 Supplement below. Our detailed evaluation can be found in the TSD 
for this proposal which is available online at www.regulations.gov in 
docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0204, on EPA Region 9's Web site at 
http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/actions/southcoast/#PM25, or from the 
EPA contact listed at the beginning of this notice.

A. Emissions Inventory

1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
    CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that each SIP include a 
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from 
all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in [the] area . . . 
.'' By requiring an accounting of actual emissions from all sources of 
the relevant pollutants in the area, this section provides for the base 
year inventory to include all emissions that contribute to the 
formation of a particular NAAQS pollutant. For the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, this includes direct PM2.5 as well 
as the main chemical precursors to the formation of secondary 
PM2.5: NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia 
(NH3). Primary PM2.5 includes condensable and 
filterable particulate matter.

[[Page 63643]]

    A state should include in its SIP submittal documentation 
explaining how the emissions data were calculated. In estimating mobile 
source emissions, a state should use the latest emissions models and 
planning assumptions available at the time the SIP is developed. At the 
time the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement were developed, 
California was required to use EMFAC2011 to estimate tailpipe and brake 
and tire wear emissions of PM2.5, NOX, 
SO2, and VOC from on-road mobile sources (78 FR 14533, March 
6, 2013). States are required to use the EPA's AP-42 road dust method 
for calculating re-entrained road dust emissions from paved roads (76 
FR 6328, February 4, 2011).
    In addition to the base year inventory submitted to meet the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), the state must also submit 
future ``baseline inventories'' for the projected attainment year and 
each reasonable further progress (RFP) milestone year, and any other 
year of significance for meeting applicable CAA requirements. By 
``baseline inventories'' (also referred to as ``projected baseline 
inventories''), we mean projected emissions inventories for future 
years that account for, among other things, the ongoing effects of 
economic growth and adopted emissions control requirements. The SIP 
submission should include documentation explaining how the emissions 
projections were calculated.
2. Emissions Inventories in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan
    The annual average planning inventories for direct PM2.5 
and all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SOX, 
VOC, and ammonia) for the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment 
area together with documentation for the inventories are found in 
Chapter 3 and Appendices III and V of the South Coast 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and in Attachment A to the 2015 Supplement. 
Additional inventory documentation specific to the air quality modeling 
is in Appendix V. Annual average inventories are provided for the 2008 
base year, and for future years 2014 and the PM2.5 
attainment year of 2015. (Additional years such as 2017, 2019, 2023 and 
2030 are also provided, but these inventories are largely for the 
purposes of ozone attainment.) Baseline inventories reflect all control 
measures adopted by the District prior to June 2012 and by CARB prior 
to August 2011. Growth factors used to project these baseline 
inventories are derived mainly from data obtained from the Southern 
California Association of Governments (SCAG), the metropolitan planning 
organization (MPO) for the Los Angeles area (2012 PM2.5 
Plan, page 3-1).
    Each inventory includes emissions from point, area, on-road, and 
non-road sources. Stationary sources include point and area sources. 
Point sources in the South Coast air basin that emit 4 tons per year or 
more of VOC, NOX, SOX or PM report annual 
emissions to the District. Point source emissions for the 2008 base 
year emission inventory were based on emissions reported from the 
SCAQMD's Annual Emissions Reporting Program.\17\ Area sources include 
smaller emissions sources distributed across the nonattainment area. 
CARB and the District estimate emissions for about 400 area source 
categories using activity information and emission factors. Activity 
data may come from national survey data or reports (e.g., from the DOE 
Energy Information Administration) or local sources such as the 
Southern California Gas Company, paint suppliers, and District 
databases. Emission factors can be based on a number of sources 
including source tests, compliance reports, and EPA's AP-42.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/compliance/annual-emission-reporting.
    \18\ AP-42 is EPA's Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission 
Factors, and has been published since 1972 as the primary source of 
EPA's emission factor information. It contains emission factors and 
process information for more than 200 air pollution source 
categories. A source category is a specific industry sector or group 
of similar emitting sources. The emission factors have been 
developed and compiled from source test data, material balance 
studies, and engineering estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Emissions inventories are constantly being revised and improved. 
Between the finalization of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the 
development of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, the District added new 
area source categories such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) 
transmission losses, storage tank and pipeline cleaning and degassing, 
and architectural colorants to the inventories in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan. We provide more detail on these updates and 
revisions in section II.A. of the TSD.
    The on-road mobile inventories use EMFAC2011 for estimating motor 
vehicle emissions (2012 PM2.5 Plan, p. 3-1).\19\ Since 
EMFAC2011 was released in 2011, CARB has adopted additional regulations 
to control air pollution from mobile sources. For the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, the State adjusted EMFAC2011 emissions estimates 
for the advanced clean cars program, reformulated gasoline rules, and 
Smog Check program to reflect these new measures (2012 PM2.5 
Plan, p. 3-5). Re-entrained paved road dust emissions were calculated 
using EPA's AP-42 road dust methodology (2012 PM2.5 Plan, 
Appendix III, p. III-1-13 and 2015 Supplement, Attachment B). SCAG, the 
MPO for the Los Angeles area, provided transportation activity data 
from the adopted 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ EMFAC2011 was approved for use in SIPs and conformity on 
March 6, 2013 (see 78 FR 14533).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Off-road emissions such as construction, mining, gardening and 
agricultural equipment emissions were calculated using CARB's 2011 In-
Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory Model. The off-road equipment population 
was adjusted due to the recession, and equipment hours of use were 
adjusted based on reported activity. Equipment load factors were 
updated using a 2009 academic study and information provided by engine 
manufacturers. External adjustments were made to CARB's off-road 
emissions estimates for locomotives, large-spark ignition engines, and 
nonagricultural internal combustion engines. CARB also calculated 
emissions from ocean-going vessels, commercial harbor craft, 
locomotives, and cargo handling equipment. Locomotive emissions reflect 
EPA regulations effective in 2008 and adjustments due to economic 
activity. The District estimated aircraft emissions. Future emissions 
forecasts are based largely on growth forecasts (demographic and 
economic information) from SCAG.
    A summary of the Plan's 2008 base year inventory and the 2014 
projected inventory is provided in Table 1 below. For a more detailed 
discussion of the inventories, see the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 
Appendix III.

[[Page 63644]]



  Table 1--Summary of Emissions for the South Coast PM2.5 Nonattainment
                                  Area
                    [Annual average in tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               2008            2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Direct PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources.............              48              50
On-Road Mobile Sources..................              19              12
Off-Road Mobile Sources.................              13               8
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................              80              70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Nitrogen Oxides
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources.............              92              77
On-Road Mobile Sources..................             462             272
Off-Road Mobile Sources.................             204             157
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................             758             506
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Sulfur Dioxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources.............              14              12
On-Road Mobile Sources..................               2               2
Off-Road Mobile Sources.................              38               4
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................              54              18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Volatile Organic Compounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources.............             257             234
On-Road Mobile Sources..................             209             117
Off-Road Mobile Sources.................             127             100
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................             593             451
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Ammonia
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary and Area Sources.............            88.7            85.6
On-Road Mobile Sources..................            19.9            16.5
Off-Road Mobile Sources.................             0.1             0.1
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................           108.9           102.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 3, Tables 3-2A, 3-4A,
  Appendix III, Table III-1-5, and 2008 ammonia inventory from Appendix
  V, Table V-4-2.

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    The emissions inventories in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan were 
made available to the public for comment and were subject to public 
hearing at both the District and State levels. See SCAQMD Governing 
Board Resolution 12-19, p. 3 and CARB Resolution 13-3, p. 4.
    The inventories in the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 
2015 Supplement are based on the most current and accurate information 
available to the State and District at the time the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and its inventories were being developed, 
including the latest EPA-approved version of California's mobile source 
emissions model, EMFAC2011, and the EPA's most recent AP-42 methodology 
for paved road dust. The inventories comprehensively address all source 
categories in the South Coast and were developed consistent with the 
EPA's inventory guidance. For these reasons, we are proposing to 
approve the 2008 base year emissions inventory in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section 
172(c)(3). We also propose to find that the baseline inventories in the 
Plan provide an adequate basis for the reasonably available control 
measure (RACM), RFP, and impracticability demonstrations in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan.

B. Air Quality Modeling

1. Requirements for Air Quality Modeling
    CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requires each State in which a Moderate 
area is located to submit a plan that includes a demonstration either 
(i) that the plan will provide for attainment by the applicable 
attainment date, or (ii) that attainment by that date is impracticable. 
The 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 2015 Supplement, and July 28, 2015 
letter include a demonstration that attainment by the Moderate 
attainment date is impracticable.
    Air quality modeling is used to establish attainment emissions 
targets, the combination of emissions of PM2.5 and 
PM2.5 precursors that the area can accommodate and still 
attain the standard, and to assess whether the proposed control 
strategy will result in attainment of the standard. Air quality 
modeling is performed for a base year and compared to air quality 
monitoring data collected during that year in order to determine model 
performance. Once the performance is determined to be acceptable, 
future year changes to the emissions inventory are simulated with the 
model to determine the relationship between emissions reductions and 
changes in ambient air quality. To project future design values, the 
model response to emission reductions, in the form of Relative Response 
Factors (RRFs), is applied to monitored design values from the base 
year.

[[Page 63645]]

    For demonstrating attainment, the EPA's recommendations for model 
input preparation, model performance evaluation, use of the model 
output for the attainment demonstration, and modeling documentation are 
described in Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for 
Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and 
Regional Haze, EPA-454/B-07-002, April 2007 (``Modeling Guidance''), as 
amended by ``Update to the 24 Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Modeled 
Attainment Test,'' Memorandum dated June 28, 2011, from Tyler Fox, Air 
Quality Modeling Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 
EPA to Regional Air Program Managers, EPA (``Modeling Guidance 
Update'').\20\ As discussed below, the Modeling Guidance recommends 
supplemental air quality analyses. These may be used as part of a 
Weight of Evidence analysis (WOEA), which assesses attainment 
projections by considering evidence other than the main air quality 
modeling attainment test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The EPA modeling guidance is available on EPA's SCRAM Web 
site, Web page: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance_sip.htm; direct 
links: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/final-03-pm-rh-guidance.pdf and http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/Update_to_the_24-hour_PM25_Modeled_Attainment_Test.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has not issued modeling guidance specific to 
impracticability demonstrations but believes that a state seeking to 
make such a demonstration generally should provide air quality modeling 
similar to that required for an attainment demonstration. The main 
difference is that for an impracticability demonstration, the 
implementation of the SIP control strategy (including RACM) does not 
result in attainment of the standard by the Moderate area attainment 
date.
    For an attainment demonstration, a thorough review of all modeling 
inputs and assumptions (including consistency with EPA guidance) is 
especially important, since the modeling must ultimately support a 
conclusion that the plan (including its control strategy) will provide 
for timely attainment of the applicable NAAQS. In contrast, for an 
impracticability demonstration, the end point is a reclassification to 
Serious, which triggers the requirement for a new Serious Area 
attainment plan with a new air quality modeling analysis, and a new 
control strategy. See CAA section 189(b)(1). Thus, the Serious Area 
planning process would provide an opportunity to refine the modeling 
analysis and/or correct any technical shortcomings in the 
impracticability demonstration. Therefore, the burden of proof will 
generally be lower for an impracticability demonstration compared to an 
attainment demonstration.
 2. Air Quality Modeling in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan
    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement contain a 
demonstration of attainment by the Moderate area attainment date, which 
is December 31, 2015. SCAQMD developed a modeling protocol for the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, which EPA reviewed during the District's 
development of the Plan. The Plan discusses air quality modeling in 
Chapter 5, ``Future Air Quality,'' and in detail in Appendix V, 
``Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations.'' The 2012 PM2.5 
Plan's attainment demonstration was based on photochemical modeling 
with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, using routinely 
available meteorological and air quality data as input. The 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and the 2015 Supplement contain an unmonitored 
area analysis as well as a weight of evidence (WOE) demonstration. The 
WOE demonstration in the 2015 Supplement accounts to some extent for 
the effect of the drought on ambient PM2.5 levels in the 
South Coast.
    In a letter dated July 28, 2015, the SCAQMD requested that EPA 
reclassify the South Coast Air Basin as Serious nonattainment for the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring data indicating 
that attainment is not practicable by the Moderate area attainment 
date, which is December 31, 2015.\21\ The SCAQMD also requested that 
the EPA treat the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement, 
together with the air quality data provided in the July 28, 2015 
letter, as a demonstration that the area cannot practicably attain by 
the Moderate area attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See letter dated July 28, 2015, from Barry R. Wallerstein, 
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air 
Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the request from the SCAQMD, the modeled attainment 
demonstration provided in the Plan, the 2015 Supplement, and the 
monitoring data provided in the July 28, 2015 letter, we are evaluating 
the State's submittal as a demonstration that attainment by the 
Moderate area attainment date is impracticable. We provide a more 
detailed evaluation of the air quality modeling in the Plan in section 
II.B. of our TSD.
3. Conclusion on Air Quality Modeling
    Given the Plan's extensive discussion of modeling procedures, 
tests, and performance analyses consistent with EPA's guidance in the 
Modeling Protocol, and the good model performance, EPA finds that the 
modeling is adequate for purposes of supporting the RACM demonstration, 
the RFP demonstration, and the demonstration of impracticability in the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan and Supplement.

C. PM2.5 Precursors

1. Requirements for the Control of PM2.5 Precursors
    The composition of PM2.5 is complex and highly variable 
due in part to the large contribution of secondary PM2.5 to 
total fine particle mass in most locations, and to the complexity of 
secondary particle formation processes. A large number of possible 
chemical reactions, often non-linear in nature, can convert gaseous 
SO2, NOX, VOC and ammonia to PM2.5, 
making them precursors to PM2.5.\22\ Formation of secondary 
PM2.5 may also depend on atmospheric conditions, including 
solar radiation, temperature, and relative humidity, and the 
interactions of precursors with preexisting particles and with cloud or 
fog droplets.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter (EPA/600/
P-99/002aF, October 2004), Chapter 3.
    \23\ EPA, Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Revisions to 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter 
(EPA-452/R-12-005, December 2012), p. 2-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule contained rebuttable 
presumptions concerning the four PM2.5 precursors applicable 
to attainment plans and control measures related to those plans. See 40 
CFR 51.1002(c). Although the rule included presumptions that states 
should address SO2 and NOX emissions in their 
attainment plans, it also included presumptions that regulation of VOCs 
and ammonia was not necessary. Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002(c), the 
EPA provided, among other things, that a state was ``not required to 
address VOC [and ammonia] as . . . PM2.5 attainment plan 
precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and ammonia] emissions in 
the state for control measures,'' unless the state or the EPA provided 
an appropriate technical demonstration showing that emissions from 
sources of these pollutants ``significantly contribute'' to 
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area. 40 CFR 
51.1002(c)(3), (4); see also 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, 
72 FR 20586 at 20589-97 (April 25, 2007).
    In NRDC, however, the D.C. Circuit remanded the EPA's 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule in its entirety, including the 
presumptions concerning VOC and ammonia in 40 CFR 51.1002. See NRDC v. 
EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C.

[[Page 63646]]

Cir. 2013). Although the court expressly declined to decide the 
specific challenge to these presumptions (see 706 F.3d at 437, n. 10 
(D.C. Cir. 2013)), the court cited CAA section 189(e) \24\ to support 
its observation that ``[a]mmonia is a precursor to fine particulate 
matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5 and 
PM10'' and that ``[f]or a PM10 nonattainment area 
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is presumptively regulated.'' 706 
F.3d at 436, n. 7 (citing CAA section 189(e)). Consistent with the NRDC 
decision, EPA now interprets the Act to require that under subpart 4, a 
state must evaluate all PM2.5 precursors for regulation 
unless the state provides a demonstration adequate to rebut the 
presumption for a particular precursor in a particular nonattainment 
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Section 189(e) of the CAA states that ``[t]he control 
requirements applicable under plans in effect under this part for 
major stationary sources of PM10 shall also apply to 
major stationary sources of PM10 precursors, except where 
the Administrator determines that such sources do not contribute 
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the standard in 
the area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The provisions of subpart 4 do not define the term ``precursor'' 
for purposes of PM2.5, nor do they explicitly require the 
control of any specifically identified particulate matter (PM) 
precursor. The statutory definition of ``air pollutant,'' however, 
provides that the term ``includes any precursors to the formation of 
any air pollutant, to the extent the Administrator has identified such 
precursor or precursors for the particular purpose for which the term 
`air pollutant' is used.'' CAA section 302(g). The EPA has identified 
SO2, NOX, VOC, and ammonia as precursors to the 
formation of PM2.5. Accordingly, the attainment plan 
requirements of subpart 4 presumptively apply to emissions of all four 
precursor pollutants and direct PM2.5 from all types of 
stationary, area, and mobiles sources, except as otherwise provided in 
the Act (e.g. CAA section 189(e)).
    Section 189(e) of the Act requires that the control requirements 
for major stationary sources of direct PM10 also apply to 
major stationary sources of PM10 precursors, except where 
the Administrator determines that such sources do not contribute 
significantly to PM10 levels that exceed the standard in the 
area. Section 189(e) contains the only express exception to the control 
requirements under subpart 4 (e.g., requirements for RACM and RACT, 
BACM and BACT, most stringent measures, and NSR) for sources of direct 
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions. Although 
section 189(e) explicitly addresses only major stationary sources, the 
EPA interprets the Act as authorizing it to also determine, under 
appropriate circumstances, that regulation of certain PM2.5 
precursors from other source categories in a given nonattainment area 
is not necessary. For example, under the EPA's longstanding 
interpretation of the control requirements that apply to stationary, 
area, and mobile sources of PM10 precursors area-wide under 
CAA section 172(c)(1) and subpart 4 (see General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 
at 13539-42), a state may demonstrate in a SIP submittal that control 
of a certain precursor pollutant is not necessary in light of its 
insignificant contribution to ambient PM2.5 levels in the 
nonattainment area.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of 
subpart 4 for PM10. See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated 
Residents v. EPA, et al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are evaluating the South Coast PM2.5 Plan in 
accordance with the presumption embodied within subpart 4 that all 
PM2.5 precursors must be addressed in the state's evaluation 
of potential control measures, unless the state adequately demonstrates 
that emissions of a particular precursor do not contribute 
significantly to ambient PM2.5 levels that exceed the 
PM2.5 NAAQs in the nonattainment area.
2. Evaluation of Precursors in 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement discuss the five 
primary pollutants that contribute to the mass of the ambient aerosol 
(i.e., ammonia, NOX, SOX, VOC, and directly 
emitted PM2.5), and states that various combinations of 
reductions in these pollutants could all provide a path to clean 
air.\26\ The Plan assesses and presents the relative value of each ton 
of precursor emission reductions, considering the resulting ambient 
microgram per cubic meter improvements in PM2.5 air 
quality.\27\ As presented in the weight of evidence discussion, trends 
of PM2.5 and NOX emissions suggest a direct 
response between lower emissions of PM2.5 and NOX 
and improved air quality. The CMAQ simulations in the Plan provide a 
set of response factors for direct PM2.5, NOX, 
SOX and VOCs, based on improvements to ambient 24-hour 
PM2.5 levels resulting from reductions of each pollutant. 
The contribution of ammonia emissions is embedded as a component of the 
SOX and NOX factors since ammonium nitrate and 
ammonium sulfate are the resultant particulate species formed in the 
atmosphere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, p. V-5-51 and 
Appendix V, Attachment 8, Relative Contributions of Precursor 
Emissions Reductions to Simulated Controlled Future-Year 24-hour 
PM2.5 Concentrations.
    \27\ 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, Attachment 8, 
Relative Contributions of Precursor Emissions Reductions to 
Simulated Controlled Future-Year 24-hour PM2.5 
Concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement describe how 
reductions in NOX, SO2, VOC and ammonia emissions 
contribute to attainment of the PM2.5 standard in the South 
Coast area and contain the District's evaluation of available control 
measures for all four of these PM2.5 precursor pollutants, 
in addition to direct PM2.5, consistent with the regulatory 
presumptions under subpart 4. The 2015 Supplement also contains a 
discussion of the nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) control 
requirements applicable to major stationary sources under CAA section 
189(e) (see 2015 Supplement at Attachment E), which we are not 
addressing in this proposal.\28\ We discuss the state's evaluation of 
potential control measures for direct PM2.5, NOX, 
SO2, VOC and ammonia in section IV.D of this rulemaking, 
``Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available Control 
Technology.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In a separate rulemaking to approve revisions to SCAQMD's 
nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) program, the EPA determined 
that the control requirements applicable under the SCAQMD SIP to 
major stationary sources of direct PM2.5 also apply to 
major stationary sources of NOX, SOX, and VOC, 
and that major stationary sources of ammonia do not contribute 
significantly to PM2.5 levels which exceed the 
PM2.5 standards in the area. See 80 FR 24821, May 1, 
2015. This rulemaking addressed the control requirements of CAA 
section 189(e) only for NNSR purposes and not for attainment 
planning purposes under subpart 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the 
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available Control 
Technology

1. Requirements for RACM/RACT
    The general subpart 1 attainment plan requirement for RACM and RACT 
is described in CAA section 172(c)(1), which requires that attainment 
plan submissions ``provide for the implementation of all reasonably 
available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including 
such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may 
be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available 
control technology) and shall provide for attainment'' of the NAAQS. 
The attainment planning requirements specific to PM2.5 under 
subpart 4 likewise impose upon states an obligation to develop 
attainment plans that require RACM on sources of direct 
PM2.5 and those PM2.5 precursors determined to be 
subject to the RACM/

[[Page 63647]]

RACT requirement. CAA section 189(a)(1)(C) requires that Moderate area 
PM2.5 SIPs contain provisions to assure that RACM are 
implemented by no later than 4 years after designation of the area. The 
EPA reads CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) together to require 
that attainment plans for Moderate nonattainment areas must provide for 
the implementation of RACM and RACT for existing sources of 
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the nonattainment 
area as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 4 years after 
designation.\29\ As part of the RACM/RACT analysis, all available 
controls should be evaluated, and reasonable controls should be 
adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ This interpretation is consistent with guidance provided in 
the General Preamble at 13540.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The terms RACM and RACT are not specifically defined in the Act, 
nor do the provisions of subpart 4 specify how states are to meet the 
RACM and RACT requirements. In longstanding guidance, however, the EPA 
has interpreted the RACM requirement to include any potential control 
measure for a point, area, on-road and non-road emission source that is 
technologically and economically feasible (General Preamble at 13540). 
The EPA has historically defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation 
that a particular stationary source is capable of meeting by the 
application of control technology (e.g., devices, systems, process 
modifications, or other apparatus or techniques that reduce air 
pollution) that is reasonably available considering technological and 
economic feasibility. See General Preamble at 13541 and 57 FR 18070, 
18073-74 (April 28, 1992).
    An evaluation of technological feasibility should include 
consideration of factors such as a source's process and operating 
conditions, raw materials, physical plant layout, and non-air quality 
and energy impacts (e.g., increased water pollution, waste disposal, 
and energy requirements) (57 FR 18070, 18073).
    An evaluation of economic feasibility should include consideration 
of factors such as cost per ton of pollution reduced (cost-
effectiveness), capital costs, and annualized cost (57 FR 18070, 
18074). Absent other indications, the EPA presumes that it is 
reasonable for similar sources to bear similar costs of emissions 
reductions. Economic feasibility of RACM and RACT is thus largely 
informed by evidence that other sources in a source category have in 
fact applied the control technology, process change, or measure in 
question in similar circumstances. Id.
2. RACM/RACT Analysis in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement's RACM/RACT 
evaluation for direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, 
ammonia, and SOX sources is presented in Appendix 
VI and in Attachment D to the 2015 Supplement. SCAG's RACM analysis for 
mobile sources is detailed in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix 
IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategies and Control Measures''). 
CARB's RACM evaluation for mobile sources is included in Appendix VI of 
the 2012 PM2.5 Plan.
    The evaluation of potential controls is presented by pollutant and 
then by rule type/source category. For stationary and area source 
categories, the comparison to recently-issued EPA CTGs is broken down 
by the current District rule or rules that apply to that source 
category. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI, and 2015 
Supplement, Attachment D.
    For the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, the District, CARB and SCAG 
each undertook a process to identify and evaluate potential measures 
that could contribute to expeditious attainment of the PM2.5 
standards in the South Coast nonattainment area. We describe these 
processes below.
    The District conducted a multi-step process to identify candidate 
RACM measures for the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan that are 
technologically and economically feasible. The first step was to 
conduct a 2012 Air Quality Technology Symposium in September of 2011. 
Technical experts from a wide variety of areas and the public were 
invited to provide new and innovative concepts to assist the South 
Coast area with attaining the PM and ozone NAAQS. The District also 
conducted ongoing outreach to engage stakeholders in the process. The 
following concepts were proposed as a result of these efforts:
     Promote zero or near-zero emission technologies and 
provide incentives for mobile source and goods movement equipment 
upgrades,
     further reduce VOC emissions from coatings, solvents, and 
various consumer products focusing on reformulations or alternatives to 
VOC-based solvents,
     conduct a technology review for NOX RECLAIM, 
and further reduce NOX emissions through the use of low 
NOX burners, fuel cells, biogas, and distributed power 
generation,
     address energy-climate change and co-benefits, the need 
for electricity storage, or new fossil-fueled peaking plants, to 
compensate for fluctuation in renewable energy supply, and use outreach 
to promote energy efficiency, influence consumer behavior, expand 
carpools, increase gas taxes, and promote multiagency collaboration.
    The second step in the District's RACM process was to look at the 
EPA's list of suggested control measures for PM2.5 
nonattainment areas described in the 2007 PM2.5 
Implementation Rule. The District summarized the results of this 
analysis in Table VI-3 in Appendix VI of the 2012 PM2.5 
Plan. This analysis shows that the District either has a pre-existing 
rule or has developed a control measure for the 2012 PM2.5 
Plan to address each of EPA's suggested types of measures.
    The third step in the District's RACM process involved analyzing 
the District's rules for compliance with the RACT standard. The results 
of this analysis are summarized in Table VI-4, Appendix VI (page VI-10) 
of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The District further supplemented 
these analyses in the 2015 Supplement, Attachment D, Tables D-4 to D-8 
to address RACM and RACT requirements for direct PM2.5 and 
all PM2.5 precursors, and to provide reasoned justifications 
for control measures that were not adopted. A few examples of RACT-
level rules in the South Coast include Rules 1146 and 1146.1, which 
control NOX from industrial and institutional boilers, Rule 
1113.3, greenwaste composting, which in addition to providing a RACT 
level of control, also controls fugitives, Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning, 
and Rule 1130, Graphic Arts.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The technical support documents for EPA's rulemaking 
actions on these rules are available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/
r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/5F5287B726E9E6F488257D790004839A/$file/
1146+and+1146+1+June+2014.pdf?OpenElement, http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/5AD85F69581DEB9388257AC50057D806?OpenDocument, http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/F65EA6DB0E3F7F06882579210082BE8C?OpenDocument, and http://
yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/
865FFD6DBAC8018F88257E82007BA257/$file/
1130+Jun+2015.pdf?OpenElement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of these evaluations, the District compared its SIP rules 
with current rules, regulations and control measures implemented in 
other nonattainment areas. Specifically, the District re-evaluated all 
of its source category-specific rules and compared the requirements in 
these rules to more than 100 rules from four other air districts in 
California (San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Metropolitan, Ventura, and 
San Francisco Bay Area), the Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston-Galveston 
areas in Texas, New York, and New Jersey. A summary of this analysis is 
presented in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI, Table VI-5 
and in the 2015 Supplement, Attachment D.

[[Page 63648]]

Table VI-5 identifies those rules from other areas that, based on the 
District's review, may be more stringent in some respects than South 
Coast rules. With respect to South Coast Rules 1115, 1130, and 1168, 
the Plan states the District's intention to provide further analyses at 
a later time. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix VI, p. VI-9. 
Attachment D to the 2015 Supplement includes an updated RACM/RACT 
analysis with additional information on RACM for ammonia sources. The 
2015 Supplement also states that the District will further evaluate 
Rule 1115 and Rule 1168, and notes that Rule 1130 was recently amended 
to address the applicable CTG. See 2015 Supplement, Attachment D, Table 
D-1 on p. D-5.
    According to the District, several of the requirements in South 
Coast Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle Assembly Line Coating Operations, are 
not as stringent as the recommendations in the 2008 EPA CTG for a few 
coating processes emitting >15 lbs/day. The two facilities subject to 
Rule 1115, however, have very small emissions, a total of about 0.02 
tpd of VOC.\31\ See 2015 Supplement, Attachment D, page D-29. In 
December 2009, we approved Rule 1168, Adhesive and Sealant 
Applications, as satisfying VOC RACT requirements under CAA section 
182(b)(2) (see 74 FR 67821, December 21, 2009). In 2014, the District 
amended South Coast Rule 1130, Graphic Arts, to reduce fountain 
solution VOC content to 16-85 g/L with optional control device 
efficiency of 90-95%, consistent with the EPA's current CTG 
recommendations. On July 14, 2015, the EPA approved the revised South 
Coast Rule 1130 as satisfying VOC RACT requirements under CAA section 
182(b)(2). (See 80 FR 40915.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ We note that 0.02 tpd is about 0.0044 percent of the total 
VOC inventory of 451 tpd for 2014. See section II.A of the TSD. See 
email correspondence from Joseph Cassmassi, SCAQMD, to Stanley Tong, 
US EPA Region 9, dated November 25, 2014 in the docket for today's 
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The RACM analyses and demonstrations conducted by CARB and SCAG for 
transportation and mobile source control measures are included in 
Appendix IV-C and its Attachment as well as the Attachment to Appendix 
VI of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. CARB has unique authority under 
the CAA to adopt standards for most categories of on- and off-road 
engines and vehicles, subject in most instances to a waiver or 
authorization by EPA under CAA section 209. The State of California has 
been a leader in the development of some of the most stringent control 
measures nationwide for on-road and off-road mobile sources and the 
fuels that power them. As part of its 2007 State Strategy as revised in 
2009 and 2011 to support attainment plans in California for 
PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone, CARB undertook an extensive public 
consultation process to identify potential SIP measures. New measures 
adopted by CARB focused on cleaning up the in-use fleet, and increasing 
the stringency of emissions standards for a number of engine 
categories, fuels, and consumer products. CARB continues to expand its 
mobile source program to further reduce emission of direct 
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. For example, in 
January 2012, CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Car program.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 78 FR 2112 (January 9, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SCAG focused its analysis on transportation control measures (TCMs) 
in the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities 
Strategy (RTP/SCS), and the analysis and results are described in 
Appendix IV-C of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, ``Regional 
Transportation Strategy and Control Measures.'' This evaluation 
considered transportation-related measures identified in section 108(f) 
of the CAA and measures adopted in other nonattainment areas of the 
country. SCAG provided a justification for measures that were 
determined to be infeasible for implementation in the South Coast 
nonattainment area. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix IV-C.
    The inventory for ammonia, provided in Appendix V of the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, indicates that the largest sources of ammonia 
include fuel combustion, waste disposal, miscellaneous sources, 
industrial sources, livestock, composting, domestic pets, and on-road 
mobile emissions. See Table 2 below (referencing 2012 PM2.5 
Plan at Appendix V, page V-4-2). The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 
2015 Supplement identify five measures that control ammonia emissions 
sources in the South Coast. The five rules are Rule 223, Emissions 
Reduction Permits from Large Confined Animal Feeding Operations 
(adopted June 2, 2006); Rule 1105.1, Reductions of PM-10 and Ammonia 
Emissions from Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (adopted November 7, 
2003); Rule 1127, Emissions Reductions from Livestock Waste (adopted 
August 6, 2004); Rule 1133.2, Emission Reductions from Co-Composting 
Operations (adopted January 10, 2003); and Rule 1133.3, Emission 
Reductions from Greenwaste Composting Operations (adopted July 8, 
2011).

        Table 2--South Coast Ammonia Emissions Inventory for 2008
                                  [tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Ammonia
                      Source category                         emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Livestock..................................................         18.6
Soil.......................................................          1.8
Domestic...................................................         25.1
Landfill...................................................          3.6
Composting.................................................         17.8
Fertilizer.................................................          1.5
Sewage Treatment...........................................          0.2
Wood Combustion............................................          0.1
Industrial.................................................         20.2
On-Road Mobile.............................................         19.9
Off-road Mobile............................................          0.1
                                                            ------------
    Total..................................................        108.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix V, Table V-4-2.

     Rule 223, Emissions Reduction Permits from Large Confined 
Animal Feeding Operations (LCAF), is a work practice rule to control 
VOC and ammonia emissions from LCAFs. It requires operators and/or 
owners to implement management practices (e.g., feed according to 
National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences 
guidelines, clean manure from corrals at least four times per year, 
land incorporate manure within 72-hours of removal, and allow liquid 
manure to stand in field no more than 24 hours after irrigation) for 
different components of the CAF operation, such as feeding, milking 
parlors, housing/bedding, manure management and land application.
    The EPA approved Rule 223 into the SIP on July 13, 2015 (see 80 FR 
39966).
     Rule 1105.1, Reductions of PM10 and Ammonia 
Emissions from Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCU), is designed to 
limit PM10 and ammonia emissions from fluid catalytic 
cracking units at oil refineries. The rule sets emission limits for 
PM10 and ammonia slip that result from the combination of 
FCCU emissions and ammonia injection used with electrostatic 
precipitators (ESP) to control FCCU emissions. Once in the atmosphere, 
ammonia emissions react with other compounds to produce secondary PM. 
The rule requires oil refineries to implement control technologies to 
meet the emissions limits including but not limited to dry and wet 
ESPs, sulfur oxide reducing agents, selective catalytic reduction, 
selective non-catalytic reduction, and wet gas scrubbers. The EPA 
approved this rule into the SIP on January 4, 2006 (see 71 FR 241).
     Rule 1127, Emissions Reductions from Livestock Waste, 
requires dairies (and other types of dairy-cattle

[[Page 63649]]

operations) to implement specific best management practices for manure 
management and disposal, and sets requirements for approving a facility 
as a manure processing operation. Specific requirements for ammonia 
include cleaning manure from corrals at least four times a year, 
disposing of manure only at approved manure processing operations, and 
applying it on agricultural land approved for that purpose. The EPA 
approved this rule into the SIP on May 23, 2013 (see 78 FR 30768).
     Rule 1133.2, Emission Reductions from Co-Composting 
Operations, requires all new or existing co-composting operations to 
compost in an enclosure that meets certain technical requirements 
(e.g., inward face velocity of air through each opening shall be at 
least 100 feet per minute unless the opening contains closure seals), 
cure using an aeration system operating under negative pressure for no 
less than 90 percent of blower operating cycle, and vent the exhaust to 
an emission control system with a control efficiency for both VOC and 
ammonia of at least 80 percent, by weight, or submit a compliance plan 
for new operations that demonstrates an overall emission reduction for 
both VOC and ammonia of 80 percent, by weight, based on emission 
factors specified in the rule. For existing operations, the required 
emission reduction is 70 percent, by weight, for both ammonia and VOC. 
Rule 1133.2 also specifies required compliance plan elements. The EPA 
approved this rule into the SIP on July 21, 2004 (see 69 FR 43518).
     Rule 1133.3, Emission Reductions from Greenwaste 
Composting Operations, requires all new or existing greenwaste 
(includes foodwaste) composting facilities to cover, water and turn 
active phase compost piles according to specific requirements (e.g., 
cover for seven days, turn only when top of pile is sufficiently wet, 
based on test method) to minimize VOC and ammonia emissions. If total 
foodwaste throughput exceeds 5,000 tons per year, any active pile with 
more than 10 percent foodwaste must be controlled by a device with an 
overall system control efficiency of 80 percent, by weight, each for 
VOC and ammonia emissions. The EPA approved this rule into the SIP on 
November 29, 2012 (see 77 FR 71129).
    In addition, for livestock waste, the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
and 2015 Supplement indicate the District will evaluate control measure 
BCM-04, Further Ammonia Reductions from Livestock Waste, as a potential 
ammonia control measure. Phase I of this control measure, scheduled for 
the 2015-2016 timeframe, involves a technology assessment. The 
technology assessment will evaluate the technical and economic 
feasibility of applying sodium bisulfate (SBS) at local dairies in the 
South Coast. SBS application has been shown to be an effective method 
for reducing ammonia from fresh manure. (See 2012 PM2.5 
Plan, Appendix IV, page IV-A-32). The 2015 Supplement states that rule 
development will follow if controls are determined to be technically 
feasible and cost-effective. See 2015 Supplement, page F-1 and Table F-
1.
    We are proposing to reclassify the South Coast from Moderate to 
Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 standard. A final 
reclassification to Serious will trigger the requirement in CAA section 
189(b)(1)(B) for the submittal of a SIP providing for the 
implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACM),\33\ among 
other things, within 18 months. As part of the District's development 
of a BACM control strategy for direct PM2.5 and those 
precursors subject to evaluation for potential controls in the South 
Coast (NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia), we encourage 
the District to consider additional measures previously identified by 
the EPA and the public in comments on the 2012 PM2.5 Plan, 
2015 Supplement, and other individual rules and plans, as well as other 
potential innovative measures for reducing emissions. As part of this 
process, we suggest that the District consult with other state/local 
agencies and environmental and industry stakeholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 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. See Addendum at 42010, 
42014. BACM must be implemented for all categories of sources in a 
serious PM2.5 nonattainment area unless the State 
adequately demonstrates that a particular source category does not 
contribute significantly to nonattainment of the PM2.5 
standard. See id. At 42011, 42012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Condensable Fraction of Direct PM2.5 Emissions
    EPA's 2007 PM2.5 implementation rule states that 
``[a]fter January 1, 2011, for purposes of establishing emissions 
limits under 51.1009 and 51.1010, States must establish such limits 
taking into consideration the condensable fraction of direct 
PM2.5 emissions.'' 40 CFR 51.1002(c). The South Coast 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement rely on several SIP-approved 
rules regulating direct PM emissions as part of the PM2.5 
control strategy (e.g., Wood Burning Fireplaces (Rule 445, adopted 
March 7, 2008, most recently revised May 3, 2013), Wood Stoves and 
Under-Fired Charbroilers (Rule 1138, adopted November 14, 1997), and 
Particulate Matter (PM) Control Devices (Rule 1155, adopted December 4, 
2009)). See 2015 Supplement, Attachment F, Table F-1 and letter dated 
July 25, 2014 transmitting South Coast Rule 1155 to EPA. As part of our 
action on any rules that regulate direct PM2.5 emissions, we 
evaluate the emission limits in the rule to ensure that they 
appropriately address CPM, as required by 40 CFR 51.1002(c). We note 
that the SIP-approved version of Rule 1138 requires testing according 
to the District's Protocol, which requires measurement of both 
condensable and filterable PM in accordance with SCAQMD Test Method 
5.1. See Rule 1138 (adopted Nov. 14, 1997, approved July 11, 2011, see 
66 FR 36170), paragraph (c)(1) and (g) and SCAQMD Protocol paragraph 
3.1.\34\ We also note that the SIP-approved version of Rule 1155 
requires measurement of both condensable and filterable PM in 
accordance with SCAQMD Test Methods 5.1, 5.2, or 5.3 as applicable. See 
Rule 1155 (adopted Dec. 4, 2009, approved March 16, 2015, see 80 FR 
13495), paragraph (e)(6).\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See SCAQMD Protocol, Determination of Particulate and 
Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Restaurant Operations, 
November 14, 1997 (available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/R9/
R9Testmethod.nsf/0/3D4DEB4D21AB4AAF882570AD005DFF69/$file/
SC%20Rest%20emiss.pdf).
    \35\ See SCAQMD Test Method 5.1, Determination of Particulate 
Matter Emissions from Stationary Sources Using a Wet Impingement 
Train, March 1989; SCAQMD Test Method 5.2, Determination of 
Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary Sources Using Heated 
Probe and Filter, March 1989; and SCAQMD Test Method 5.3, 
Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions from Stationary 
Sources Using an in-Stack Filter, October 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    We find that the process followed in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
and 2015 Supplement to identify RACM/RACT is generally consistent with 
the EPA's recommendations in the General Preamble. The process included 
compiling a comprehensive list of potential control measures for 
sources of direct PM2.5, NOX, VOC, 
SO2, and ammonia in the South Coast. This list included 
measures suggested in public comments on the Plan. See 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, Appendices VI and IV-C. As part of this process, 
the District, CARB, and SCAG evaluated potential controls for all 
relevant source categories for economic and technological feasibility, 
and provided justifications for the rejection of certain identified 
measures. Id. After completing this evaluation, the District stated its 
intent to analyze

[[Page 63650]]

potential rule improvements with respect to rules 1115, 1130, and 1168. 
See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4 and Appendices VI, IV-A, and 
IV-C, and 2015 Supplement, Attachment D. Since submittal of the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan in February 2013, the District has strengthened, 
adopted and submitted Rule 1130, which EPA approved on July 14, 2015 
(see 80 FR 40915). EPA approved Rule 1168 as satisfying VOC RACT on 
December 21, 2009 (see 74 FR 67821). With respect to Rule 1115, as 
noted above, the emissions inventory for these sources is very small.
    We have reviewed the District's determination in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement that its stationary and area 
source control measures represent RACM/RACT for direct 
PM2.5, NOX, VOC, ammonia and SO2. Our 
rulemaking actions on District rules generally provide the bases for 
our conclusions that the emission limits and/or other control 
requirements in the rules represent a RACT level of control, at 
minimum, for the relevant source categories.\36\ We also reviewed the 
potential additional control measures that the District considered, 
including those identified by public commenters during the State/
District rulemaking processes, and believe that the District adequately 
justified its conclusions with respect to each of these measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ A full list of the District's rules, including citations to 
our most recent action on each rule can be found in Appendix A to 
this TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we have reviewed the analysis of current and potentially 
available controls for both on-road and off-road mobile sources in 
Appendices IV-C and VI, as well as the Attachment to Appendix VI. As we 
have noted in previous actions on South Coast plans,\37\ California is 
a leader in the development and implementation of stringent control 
measures for on-road and off-road mobile sources. Its current program 
addresses the full range of mobile sources in the South Coast through 
regulatory programs for both new and in-use vehicles and through 
incentive grant programs. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix III, 
Table III-1-3. The District has also adopted measures to reduce 
emissions from mobile sources including its Surplus Opt-in for 
NOX (SOON) rule (Rule 2449) and on-road mobile sources 
including its employer trip reduction rule (Rule 2202) and has a well-
funded incentive grants program focused on mobile sources. See 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4. Overall, we believe that the State, 
District, and MPO programs provide for the implementation of RACM for 
emissions of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors 
from mobile sources in the South Coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See the proposed approvals of the South Coast 2007 [8-hour] 
Ozone Plan at 76 FR 57872, 57879 (September 16, 2011) and the 2007 
AQMP addressing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at 76 FR 41562. 
41570 (July 14, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reasons, we propose to find that the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement provide for the 
implementation of all RACM/RACT that can be implemented prior to the 
applicable Moderate area attainment date as required by CAA sections 
189(a)(1)(C) and 172(c)(1), and to approve the RACM/RACT demonstration 
in the South Coast 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ The 2012 PM2.5 Plan is the latest in a series of 
air quality plans and control strategies that the District, CARB and 
SCAG have developed to provide for attainment of the NAAQS in the 
South Coast. These plans include the 2003 PM10 Plan 
(approved 70 FR 69081 (November 14, 2005)); the 2003 Extreme [1-
hour] Ozone Attainment Plan (approved 74 FR 10176 (March 8, 2009); 
the 2007 [8-hour] Ozone Plan (approved 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012)); 
the 2007 State Strategy for the 1997 Ozone and PM2.5 
standards (approved 76 FR 69928 (November 9, 2011)); the 2007 
PM2.5 SIP as revised in 2009 and 2011 (approved 66 FR 
69928 (November 9, 2011)); and the RACT SIP submitted in 2007 
(approved 73 FR 76947 (December 18, 2008)). In each of our 
rulemakings on these Plans, we approved a RACM and/or RACT 
demonstration that addressed one or more PM2.5 
precursors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Major Stationary Source Control Requirements Under CAA Section 
189(e)

    CAA section 189(e) specifically requires that the control 
requirements applicable to major stationary sources of direct 
PM2.5 also apply to major stationary sources of 
PM2.5 precursors, except where the Administrator determines 
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5 
levels that exceed the standard in the area (see General Preamble at 
13539 and 13541 to 42). The control requirements applicable to major 
stationary sources of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 
precursors in a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area include, 
at minimum, the requirements of a nonattainment new source review 
(NNSR) permit program meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5) 
(see CAA 189(a)(1)(A)).
    In a separate rulemaking to approve revisions to SCAQMD's NNSR 
permit program, the EPA evaluated the District's discussion of control 
requirements applicable to major stationary sources (Attachment E of 
the 2015 Supplement) and determined that the District's SIP-approved 
NNSR program satisfies the requirements of CAA section 189(e) for 
direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors.\39\ 
Accordingly, in this action, the EPA is not addressing the NNSR control 
requirements that apply to major stationary sources of direct 
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the South Coast 
area under CAA section 189(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See n. 29, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Adopted Control Strategy

1. Requirements for Control Strategies
    CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) provides that each SIP ``shall include 
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means or 
techniques . . . as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as 
may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirement of 
the Act.'' Section 172(c)(6) of the Act, which applies to nonattainment 
area SIPs, is virtually identical to section 110(a)(2)(A).\40\ Measures 
necessary to meet RACM/RACT and the additional control requirements 
under section 172(c)(6) must be adopted by the State in an enforceable 
form (General Preamble at 13541) and submitted to the EPA for approval 
into the SIP under CAA section 110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ The language in sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) is 
quite broad, allowing a SIP to contain any enforceable ``means or 
techniques'' that EPA determines are ``necessary or appropriate'' to 
meet CAA requirements, such that the area will attain as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the designated date. 
Furthermore, the express allowance for ``schedules and timetables'' 
demonstrates that Congress understood that all required controls 
might not be in place when a SIP is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commitments approved by the EPA under CAA section 110(k)(3) are 
enforceable by the EPA and citizens under CAA sections 113 and 304, 
respectively. In the past, the EPA has approved enforceable commitments 
and courts have enforced actions against states that failed to comply 
with them.\41\ Additionally, if a state fails to meet its commitments, 
the EPA may make a finding of failure to implement the SIP under CAA 
section 179(a)(4), which starts an 18-month period for the state to 
correct the non-implementation before mandatory sanctions are imposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ E.g., American Lung Ass'n of N.J. v. Kean, 670 F. Supp. 
1285 (D.N.J. 1987), aff'd, 871 F.2d 319 (3rd Cir. 1989); NRDC, Inc. 
v. N.Y. State Dept. of Env. Cons., 668 F. Supp. 848 (S.D.N.Y. 1987); 
Citizens for a Better Env't v. Deukmejian, 731 F. Supp. 1448, recon. 
granted in par, 746 F. Supp. 976 (N.D. Cal. 1990); Coalition for 
Clean Air v. South Coast Air Quality Mgt. Dist., No. CV 97-6916-HLH, 
(C.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Once the EPA determines that circumstances warrant use of an 
enforceable commitment, the EPA considers three factors in determining 
whether to approve the use of an enforceable commitment to meet a CAA 
requirement: (a) Does the commitment address a limited portion of the 
CAA-required program; (b) is the state

[[Page 63651]]

capable of fulfilling its commitment; and (c) is the commitment for a 
reasonable and appropriate period of time.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the 
EPA's interpretation of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) and 
the Agency's use and application of the three factor test in 
approving enforceable commitments in the Houston-Galveston ozone SIP 
in BCCA Appeal Group et al. v. EPA et al., 355 F.3d 817 (5th Cir. 
2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Control Strategy in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    For purposes of evaluating the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement, we have divided the measures relied on to satisfy the 
applicable control requirements into two categories: Baseline measures 
and control strategy measures.
    As the term is used here, baseline measures are federal, State, and 
District rules and regulations adopted prior to June of 2012 for 
District rules, and prior to August of 2011 for CARB rules (i.e., prior 
to the development of 2012 PM2.5 Plan) that continue to 
achieve emissions reductions through the current attainment year of 
2015 and beyond.\43\ The Plan describes many of these measures in 
Chapter 4 and in Appendices III, IV-B, IV-C and VI. Reductions from 
these baseline measures are incorporated into the baseline inventory 
and reductions from the District measures in the plan are individually 
quantified in Appendix III, Table III-2-2B. According to the Plan, 
these measures provide most of the emissions reductions projected to 
occur between the base year of 2008 and the Moderate area attainment 
date of 2015. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4, and Appendix 
V, and 2015 Supplement Attachment A; see also Appendix A of the TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ These measures are typically rules that have compliance 
dates that occur after the adoption date of a plan and mobile source 
measures that achieve reductions as older engines are replaced 
through attrition (e.g., through fleet turnover).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Control strategy measures are the new rules, rule revisions, 
commitments, and other measures that provide the additional increment 
of emissions reductions needed beyond the baseline measures to provide 
for attainment (when applicable), to demonstrate RFP, to meet the RACM/
RACT requirement, or to provide for contingency measures.
    The District included several new measures in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement to provide for attainment of 
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. First, the District committed to 
adopt, submit, and implement amendments to two District rules (Rule 444 
and Rule 445) to reduce direct PM2.5 emissions from open 
burning and residential wood burning activities. See 2012 
PM2.5 Plan, p. 4-8, Table 4-2 and SCAQMD Governing Board 
Resolution 12-19 (Dec. 7, 2012), p. 8, as revised by 2015 Supplement, 
Attachment F, Table F-1 and SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 15-2 
(Feb. 19, 2015). Second, the District committed to achieve 11.7 tpd of 
direct PM2.5 emission reductions by 2015, either from these 
two amended rules or from substitute measures as necessary to address 
any shortfall in emission reductions. Id. Third, the District committed 
to carry out technology assessments to address emissions from under-
fired charbroilers and livestock waste in 2015-2016 and 2017, 
respectively. Id. Finally, the District committed to adopt revisions to 
its NOX RECLAIM program to achieve an additional 2 tpd of 
NOX emission reductions in 2015, as a contingency measure, 
and to adopt backstop measures related to ports and port-related 
facilities in 2015. Id. Following the State's submittal of the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan to the EPA in 2013, the District adopted 
amendments to Rule 444 and Rule 445 and on June 11, 2013, the District 
submitted these revised rules to the EPA for SIP approval, consistent 
with its commitments in the Plan. These measures and commitments are 
listed in Table 3 below.

                    Table 3--SCAQMD 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement Specific Commitments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Implementation         Emission
      Rule No.        Measure number and description     Adoption date           date             reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
444.................  Further Reductions from Open    2013...............              2013  4.6 tpd PM2.5
                       Burning \44\.
445.................  Further Reductions from         2013...............              2013  7.1 tpd PM2.5
                       Residential Wood Burning \45\.
1138................  Emissions Reductions from       2017...............               N/A  TBD
                       Under-fired Charbroilers.
1127................  Further Ammonia Emissions From  2015-2016                         N/A  TBD
                       Livestock Waste.                Technology
                                                       Assessment.
2002................  Further NOX Reductions from     2015...............               N/A  2 tpd NOX
                       RECLAIM.
4001................  Backstop Measures for Indirect  2015...............               N/A  N/A
                       Sources of Emissions from
                       Ports and Port-related
                       Facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2012 PM2.5 Plan, Chapter 4, Table 4-2, as amended by 2015 Supplement, Attachment F, Table F-1.

3. Evaluation and Conclusions
    The Plan provides for the majority of the emissions reductions 
necessary for attainment to be achieved from baseline measures. These 
reductions come from a combination of District, State and federal 
stationary and mobile source measures.\46\ Over the past four decades, 
the District has adopted or revised almost 100 prohibitory rules that 
limit emissions of NOX, SO2, ammonia, VOC, and 
particulate matter from stationary sources. See Appendix A of this TSD. 
The vast majority of these rules are currently SIP-approved and as 
such, their emissions reductions are fully creditable in attainment-
related SIPs. The District's most recent amendments to Rule 444 and 
Rule 445 further tighten the District's control strategy for direct 
PM2.5 emissions. California has also adopted standards for 
many categories of on- and off-road vehicles and engines as well as 
standards for gasoline and diesel fuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Approved on September 26, 2013, see 78 FR 59249.
    \45\ Ibid.
    \46\ These federal measures include EPA's national emissions 
standards for heavy duty diesel trucks (66 FR 5001 (January 18, 
2001)), certain new construction and farm equipment (Tier 2 and 3 
non-road engines standards, 63 FR 56968 (October 23, 1998) and Tier 
4 diesel non-road engine standards, 69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004)), 
and locomotives (63 FR 18978 (April 16, 1998) and 73 FR 37045 (June 
30, 2008)). States are allowed to rely on reductions from federal 
measures in attainment and RFP demonstrations and for other SIP 
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State's mobile source measures fall into two categories: 
Measures for which the State has obtained or has applied to obtain a 
waiver of federal pre-emption under CAA section 209 (``section 209 
waiver measures'' or ``waiver measures'') and those for which the State 
is not required to obtain a waiver (``non-waiver measures'' or ``SIP 
measures'').
    Under the CAA, the EPA is charged with establishing national 
emission limits for mobile sources. States are

[[Page 63652]]

generally preempted from establishing such limits except for 
California, which can establish these limits subject to EPA waiver or 
authorization under CAA section 209 (referred to herein as ``waiver 
measures''). Over the years, the EPA has issued waivers or 
authorizations for many mobile source regulations adopted by CARB. 
California attainment and maintenance plans rely on emissions 
reductions from implementation of the waiver measures through use of 
emissions models such as EMFAC, and the South Coast 2012 
PM2.5 Plan is no exception.
    Historically, the EPA has allowed California to take credit for 
such ``waiver'' measures even though the waiver measures themselves 
(i.e., CARB's regulations) have not been adopted and approved as part 
of the California SIP. However, a recent decision by the Ninth Circuit 
Court of Appeals held that EPA's longstanding practice in this regard 
was at odds with the CAA requirement that state and local emissions 
limits relied upon to meet the NAAQS be enforceable by the EPA or 
private citizens through adoption and approval of such limits in the 
SIP.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Committee for a Better Arvin v. EPA, 786 F.3d 1169 (9th 
Cir. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the court's decision, CARB has adopted the necessary 
waiver measures as revisions to the California SIP and submitted them 
to EPA for approval.\48\ EPA intends to propose action on these waiver 
measures in a separate rulemaking. Once approved as part of the SIP, 
the measures will be enforceable by the EPA or private citizens under 
the CAA. In today's action, the EPA is proposing to approve certain 
elements of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement in part 
based on our expectation that these waiver measures will soon become 
federally enforceable as a result of our approval of the measures as 
part of the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See letter dated August 14, 2015, from Richard W. Corey, 
Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared 
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Non-waiver measures include improvements to California's inspection 
and maintenance (I/M) program, SmogCheck, and cleaner burning gasoline 
and diesel regulations as well as the District's stationary source and 
mobile source rules. See TSD at Appendix A for a list of District rules 
and EPA actions on them.
    As discussed above, we generally consider three factors in 
determining whether to approve the use of enforceable commitments to 
meet a CAA requirement. In this case, however, the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement do not rely on either the 
rule amendment commitments or the emission reduction commitments in its 
impracticability demonstration, RACM demonstration, RFP demonstration, 
or quantitative milestones, or to meet any other CAA requirement. 
Therefore, we do not need to apply this three-factor test before 
proposing to approve the District's commitments into the SIP. Approval 
of these commitments will strengthen the SIP and contribute to the 
SIP's purpose of ``eliminating or reducing the severity and number of 
violations of the [PM2.5 NAAQS] and achieving expeditious 
attainment of such standards.'' See CAA 176(c)(1)(A).
    We are proposing to approve the District's commitments to adopt and 
implement specific control measures identified in Table 4-2 in the 
South Coast 2012 AQMP (as amended March 4, 2015 by Table F-1 in 
Attachment F of the 2015 Supplement) and to achieve specified 
NOX emission reductions, to the extent that these 
commitments have not yet been fulfilled. Specifically, we are proposing 
to approve the District's commitments to: (1) Carry out a technology 
assessment to address emissions from under-fired charbroilers by 2017, 
(2) conduct a technology assessment for livestock waste by 2016, (3) 
adopt revisions to its NOX RECLAIM program or other 
enforceable control measures to achieve an additional 2 tpd of 
NOX emission reductions in 2015, and (4) adopt backstop 
measures for indirect sources of emissions from ports and port-related 
facilities. See 2012 PM2.5 Plan, p. 4-8, Table 4-2 and 
SCAQMD Governing Board Resolution 12-19 (Dec. 7, 2012), pp. 7-8, as 
revised by 2015 Supplement, Attachment F, Table F-1 and SCAQMD 
Governing Board Resolution 15-2 (Feb. 19, 2015), pp. 2-3.
    With respect to the commitments to adopt Rules 444 and 445 and to 
achieve 11.7 tpd of direct PM2.5 emission reductions, the 
District has satisfied these commitments by submitting the fully 
adopted rules to EPA on June 11, 2013, together with technical 
documentation to support its conclusion that these rules will achieve 
11.7 tpd of direct PM2.5 emission reductions in 2015.\49\ 
The EPA approved Rule 444 and Rule 445 on September 26, 2013 (see 79 FR 
59249).\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See ``Rule Evaluation Form,'' South Coast Rules 444 and 
445, and South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Final 
Staff Report, Proposed Amended Rule 445--Wood-Burning Devices, 
Proposed Amended Rule 444--Open Burning, May 2013, pp. 15-16.
    \50\ See letter dated June 11, 2013, from Edie Chang, Deputy 
Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared 
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, transmitting South 
Coast Rules 444 and 445.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Demonstration That Attainment by the Moderate Area Attainment Date 
is Impracticable

1. Requirements for Attainment/Impracticability of Attainment 
Demonstrations
    CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requires that each Moderate area 
attainment plan include a demonstration that the plan provides for 
attainment by the latest applicable Moderate area deadline or, 
alternatively, that attainment by the latest applicable attainment date 
is impracticable. A demonstration that the plan provides for attainment 
must be based on air quality modeling, and the EPA generally recommends 
that a demonstration of impracticability also be based on air quality 
modeling consistent with EPA's modeling guidance (General Preamble at 
13538).\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ For more information on the CAA's air quality modeling 
requirements, please see section II.B of the TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 188(c) states, in relevant part, that the Moderate area 
attainment date ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than the end of the sixth calendar year after the area's designation as 
nonattainment. . . .'' For the South Coast area, which was initially 
designated as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 standard 
effective December 14, 2009, the applicable Moderate area attainment 
date under section 188(c) is as expeditiously as practicable but no 
later than December 31, 2015.
    In SIP submissions to demonstrate impracticability, the State 
should document that its required control strategy in the attainment 
plan represents the application of RACM/RACT to existing sources. The 
EPA believes it is appropriate to require adoption of all available 
control measures that are reasonable (i.e., technologically and 
economically feasible) in areas that do not demonstrate timely 
attainment, even where those measures cannot be implemented within the 
4-year timeframe for implementation of RACM under CAA section 
189(a)(1)(C). The impracticability demonstration will then be based on 
a showing that the area cannot attain by the applicable attainment 
date, notwithstanding implementation of the required controls.
2. Impracticability Demonstration for the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
and 2015 Supplement
    By letter dated July 28, 2015, the District requested that the EPA 
reclassify the South Coast Air Basin to

[[Page 63653]]

``Serious'' for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The letter provided 
preliminary 2015 air quality monitoring data for the Mira Loma 
monitoring station supporting a conclusion that attainment of the 2006 
PM2.5 standard by December 31, 2015 in the South Coast is 
impracticable.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See letter dated July 28, 2015, from Barry R. Wallerstein, 
Executive Officer, SCAQMD, to Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air 
Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based in part on the information contained in this letter and in 
the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and Supplement, we have conducted an 
analysis of recent PM2.5 monitoring data for the South Coast 
PM2.5 nonattainment area.\53\ For this analysis, the EPA 
used certified data for 2013, 2014 and preliminary data available for 
2015.\54\ Although the State and District originally intended for the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement to demonstrate that the 
area would attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the Moderate area 
attainment date of December 31, 2015, more recent monitoring data show 
that 24-hour PM2.5 levels in the South Coast, with a current 
design value (2012-2014) of 38 [micro]g/m\3\ at the Mira Loma 
monitoring site, continue to be above the 35 [micro]g/m\3\ level of the 
2006 PM2.5 standard, and the recent trends in the South 
Coast's 24-hour PM2.5 levels are not consistent with a 
projection of attainment by the end of 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Memorandum dated August 21, 2015 from Michael Flagg, 
U.S. EPA, Region 9 Air Quality Analysis Office, to South Coast 
Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0204, Subject: Practicability of South Coast 
2015 Attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM NAAQS (``Flagg Memo'').
    \54\ Some data in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarter of 2014 may have 
been impacted by a temporary lab closure and other issues at SCAQMD 
and are under current review. As a precautionary measure, we 
conducted an additional analysis on the impracticability of 
attaining by December 31, 2015 that completely excluded these data. 
The outcome of the analysis further supported the impracticability 
of attainment by the applicable attainment date. See Attachment to 
Flagg Memo, under ``24-hour practicability'' tab.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA calculated the maximum allowed 2015 concentrations for all 
monitors in the area, and compared them to the estimated 2015 98th 
percentile. If the estimated 2015 98th percentile was greater than the 
maximum allowed 2015 98th percentile concentration, the EPA considered 
attainment at that monitoring site impracticable. For each monitor, the 
EPA estimated the 2015 98th percentile from the 2015 data available in 
AQS as of August 2015, based a number of assumptions.\55\ The EPA 
assumed that the concentrations measured during the remainder of 2015 
would be no higher than those already recorded, so the 98th percentile 
could be chosen from among the already recorded data. This is a 
conservative assumption for assessing the impracticability of 
attainment, since future concentrations and 98th percentiles could be 
higher than recorded values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ EPA also assumed that the sampling rate observed so far 
would continue throughout the year; this yielded an estimate of the 
number of total samples expected for 2015, and allowed for selection 
of the corresponding rank of the daily data available to use as the 
98th percentile in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, 
section 4.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's analysis showed that during 2015, two monitoring sites 
(Rubidoux and Mira Loma-Van Buren) had estimated 98th percentiles 
greater than the maximum allowed 98th percentile concentration for 
2015, which indicates that attainment of the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS by the end of 2015 is impracticable.
    In a separate analysis, EPA assumed that Rubidoux and Mira Loma-Van 
Buren collected a minimum of 351 daily samples (i.e. consistent with an 
everyday sampling frequency) in 2015, which would allow for selection 
of the 8th highest recorded value as the 98th percentile for 2015. This 
assumption resulted in selection of the lowest 98th percentile value 
possible for 2015, making the analysis more conservative than the 
previous approach. Even under this assumption, both Rubidoux and Mira 
Loma-Van Buren had estimated 2015 98th percentiles greater than the 
maximum allowed 2015 98th percentile.
3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    Our conservative assessment of recent PM2.5 air quality 
data indicates that attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard in 
the South Coast by December 31, 2015 is impracticable. We have also 
evaluated the RACM/RACT demonstration in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
and 2015 Supplement and find that it provides for the expeditious 
implementation of all RACM that may feasibly be implemented at this 
time, consistent with the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 
189(a)(1)(C) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast. 
See section II.D of this TSD. Implementation of this RACM/RACT control 
strategy appears, however, to be insufficient to bring the South Coast 
area into attainment by December 31, 2015.
    Based on this evaluation, we propose to approve the State's 
demonstration in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement 
that attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard by the Moderate 
area attainment date in the South Coast is impracticable, consistent 
with the requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii). Based on this 
proposal, we propose to reclassify the South Coast as Serious 
nonattainment, which would trigger requirements for the State to submit 
a Serious area plan consistent with the requirements of subparts 1 and 
4 of part D, Title I of the Act (see Section III of this TSD).

H. Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative Milestones

1. Requirements for Reasonable Further Progress and Quantitative 
Milestones
    CAA section 172(c)(2) requires nonattainment area plans to provide 
for reasonable further progress (RFP). In addition, CAA section 189(c) 
requires PM2.5 nonattainment area SIPs to include 
quantitative milestones to be achieved every 3 years until the area is 
redesignated to attainment and which demonstrate reasonable further 
progress (RFP), as defined in CAA section 171(1). Section 171(1) 
defines RFP as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the 
relevant air pollutant as are required by [Part D] or may reasonably be 
required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of 
the applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.'' Neither subpart 1 nor 
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act requires that a set percentage 
of emissions reductions be achieved in any given year for purposes of 
satisfying the RFP requirement.
    RFP has historically been met by showing annual incremental 
emission reductions sufficient generally to maintain at least linear 
progress toward attainment by the applicable deadline (Addendum at 
42015). As discussed in the Addendum, requiring linear progress in 
reductions of direct PM2.5 and any individual precursor in a 
PM2.5 plan may be appropriate in situations where:
     The pollutant is emitted by a large number and range of 
sources,
     the relationship between any individual source or source 
category and overall air quality is not well known,
     a chemical transformation is involved (e.g., secondary 
particulate significantly contributes to PM2.5 levels over 
the standard), and/or
     the emission reductions necessary to attain the 
PM2.5 standard are inventory-wide. Id.
    The EPA's guidance in the Addendum at 42015 recommends that 
requiring linear progress is less appropriate in other situations, such 
as:
     Where there are a limited number of sources of direct 
PM2.5 or a precursor,
     where the relationships between individual sources and air 
quality are relatively well defined, and/or
     where the emission control systems utilized (e.g., at 
major point sources)

[[Page 63654]]

will result in swift and dramatic emission reductions. Id.
    In nonattainment areas characterized by any of these latter 
conditions, RFP may be better represented as step-wise progress as 
controls are implemented and achieve significant reductions soon 
thereafter. For example, if an area's nonattainment problem can be 
attributed to a few major sources, EPA guidance indicates that ``RFP 
should be met by `adherence to an ambitious compliance schedule' which 
is likely to periodically yield significant emission reductions of 
direct PM2.5 or a PM2.5 precursor'' (Addendum at 
42015).
    Plans for PM2.5 nonattainment areas should include 
detailed schedules for compliance with emission regulations in the area 
and provide corresponding annual emission reductions to be realized 
from each milestone in the schedule (Addendum at 42016). In reviewing 
an attainment plan under subpart 4, EPA evaluates whether the annual 
incremental emission reductions to be achieved are reasonable in light 
of the statutory objective of timely attainment.
    Section 189(c) provides that the quantitative milestones submitted 
by a state for an area also must be consistent with RFP for the area. 
Thus, the EPA determines an area's compliance with RFP in conjunction 
with determining its compliance with the quantitative milestone 
requirement. Because RFP is an annual emission reduction requirement 
and the quantitative milestones are to be achieved every 3 years, when 
a state demonstrates an area's compliance with the quantitative 
milestone requirement, it will demonstrate that RFP has been achieved 
during each of the relevant 3 years. Quantitative milestones should 
consist of elements that allow progress to be quantified or measured. 
Specifically, states should identify and submit quantitative milestones 
providing for the amount of emission reductions adequate to achieve the 
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (Addendum at 42016). 
Implementation of control measures comprising the RFP plan may provide 
a means for satisfying the quantitative milestone requirement (see 
id.). The Act requires states to include RFP and quantitative 
milestones even for areas that cannot practicably attain.
2. RFP Demonstration and Quantitative Milestones in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement
    South Coast's 2012 PM2.5 Plan was originally developed 
in accordance with the requirements of subpart 1 and the 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule (see 75 FR 20586, April 25, 2007), 
which did not require a submittal of a separate RFP plan where the 
State submits a plan demonstrating attainment within five years of the 
date of designation (see 40 CFR 51.1009(b)). Because the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan as originally adopted (in December 2012) included 
the State's demonstration of attainment by December 14, 2014, which is 
five years from the date of designation,\56\ the Plan does not include 
a separate RFP demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Section 172(a)(2)(A) of the CAA states, in relevant part, 
that the attainment date for a nonattainment area ``shall be the 
date by which attainment can be achieved as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than 5 years from the date such area was 
designated nonattainment under section [107(d)].'' Because the EPA 
designated South Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour 
standard effective December 14, 2009 (74 FR 58688, November 13, 
2009), under subpart 1 the area was required to attain this standard 
no later than December 14, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the D.C. Circuit's January 2013 decision remanding the 
2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule (see NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 
428 (D.C. Cir. 2013)) and the EPA's June 2014 promulgation of Moderate 
area classifications in the deadline and classifications rule (see 79 
FR 31566, June 2, 2014), the District developed the 2015 Supplement to 
address the applicable subpart 4 requirements for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS. By the time the State and District submitted 
this Supplement to EPA in early 2015, less than a year remained before 
the December 31, 2015 Moderate area attainment date applicable to the 
area under subpart 4, and ambient air quality monitoring data indicated 
the area was very close to attaining the 2006 PM2.5 
standard. See 2015 Supplement, p. 4. Accordingly, the 2015 Supplement 
does not contain a separate RFP or quantitative milestone 
demonstration.
3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    As a result of the NRDC decision remanding the 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the EPA has considered whether 
the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement meet the RFP 
requirement in section 172(c)(2) of the Act and proposes to find that 
they do.
    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan demonstrates that all RACM/RACT are 
being implemented as expeditiously as practicable and identifies 
projected emission levels for 2014 that reflect full implementation of 
the State's and District's RACM/RACT control strategy for the area.\57\ 
The Plan also shows steady reductions in direct PM2.5, 
NOX, VOC, SOX, and ammonia emissions during the 
2008-2014 period. Figures IIH-1 and IIH-2 show the emissions 
trajectories for direct PM2.5 and each PM2.5 
precursor addressed in the control strategy which indicate generally 
linear reductions. We propose, therefore, to approve the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement as satisfying the requirement 
for RFP in CAA section 172(c)(2) for the 2006 PM2.5 
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See 2012 PM2.5 plan at Chapter 4, pp. 4-4 
through 4-13, Table 4-7, and Appendix III, Table III-2-2B 
(``Emission Reductions (Tons per Day) in the Baseline by District 
Rules'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to quantitative milestones, the EPA is proposing to 
establish December 31, 2014 as the starting point for the first 3-year 
period under CAA section 189(e) for the 2006 PM2.5 standard 
in the South Coast. This date is the due date for the State's submittal 
of attainment-related SIPs necessary to satisfy the Moderate area 
requirements applicable to the South Coast area.\58\ Accordingly, the 
first quantitative milestone date for the South Coast area would be 
December 31, 2017 (3 years after December 31, 2014). Because this date 
falls well after the applicable Moderate area attainment date for the 
area, which is December 31, 2015, we propose to find that quantitative 
milestones are not necessary in this particular Moderate area plan. If, 
however, EPA either finalizes this proposal to reclassify the South 
Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 
standard or determines that the area has failed to attain by the 
December 31, 2015 attainment date, the State and District will be 
required to submit a Serious area plan that contains, among other 
things, quantitative milestones that demonstrate RFP at each milestone 
date, starting December 31, 2017 and at subsequent 3-year intervals 
until the area is redesignated to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Subpart 4 requires states to submit attainment plans within 
18 months after nonattainment designations (CAA 189(a)(2)). Due to 
unusual circumstances, however, the EPA has by rule created a later 
deadline for submittal of attainment plan submission date for the 
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in order to provide states a reasonable 
amount of time to address the requirements of subpart 4 consistent 
with the NRDC decision. See 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Contingency Measures

1. Requirements for Contingency Measures
    Under CAA section 172(c)(9), PM2.5 plans must include 
contingency measures to be implemented if an area fails to meet RFP 
(``RFP contingency measures'') and, where the SIP includes a 
demonstration of attainment (as opposed to a demonstration of 
impracticability), contingency measures to be implemented if an area 
fails to attain the PM2.5 standards by the applicable 
attainment date (``attainment

[[Page 63655]]

contingency measures''). Under subpart 4, however, the EPA interprets 
section 172(c)(9) in light of the specific requirements for particulate 
matter nonattainment areas. Section 189(b)(1)(A) differentiates between 
attainment plans that provide for timely attainment and those that 
demonstrate that attainment is impracticable. Where a SIP includes a 
demonstration that attainment by the applicable attainment date is 
impracticable, the state need only submit contingency measures to be 
implemented if an area fails to meet RFP.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ The EPA does not interpret the requirement for failure-to-
attain contingency measures to apply to Moderate PM2.5 
nonattainment areas that cannot practicably attain the NAAQS by the 
statutory attainment date. Rather, the EPA believes it is 
appropriate for the state to identify and adopt attainment 
contingency measures as part of the Serious area attainment plan 
that it will develop once the EPA reclassifies the area (Addendum at 
42015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of contingency measures is to continue progress in 
reducing emissions while the SIP is being revised to meet the missed 
RFP milestone or to provide for attainment.
    The principal requirements for contingency measures are:
     Contingency measures must be fully adopted rules or 
control measures that are ready to be implemented quickly upon failure 
to meet RFP or failure of the area to meet the standard by its 
attainment date.
     The SIP should contain trigger mechanisms for the 
contingency measures, specify a schedule for implementation, and 
indicate that the measures will be implemented without further action 
by the state or by the EPA. In general, we expect all actions needed to 
effect full implementation of the measures to occur within 60 days 
after the EPA notifies the state of a failure.
     The contingency measures should consist of control 
measures for the area that are not relied on to demonstrate attainment 
or RFP.
     The measures should provide for emissions reductions 
equivalent to approximately one year of reductions needed for RFP 
calculated as the overall level of reductions needed to demonstrate 
attainment divided by the number of years from the base year to the 
attainment year. (General Preamble at 13543 and Addendum at 42014).
2. Contingency Measures in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    Contingency measures for failure to attain are described in Chapter 
6, pages 6-7 to 6-13 of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. The 2012 
PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement do not include contingency 
measures for failure to meet RFP.
3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    Because we are proposing to approve the State's demonstration that 
attainment by the applicable Moderate area attainment date of December 
31, 2015 is impracticable in the South Coast and to reclassify the area 
to serious, contingency measures for failure to attain are not required 
as part of this Moderate area plan. Upon reclassification of the South 
Coast area as a Serious area, California will be required to adopt 
attainment contingency measures as part of the Serious area attainment 
plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    We propose to find that the RFP contingency measure requirement for 
any RFP milestone year prior to 2014 is now moot as applied to the 
South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area. The sole purpose of 
RFP contingency measures is to provide continued progress if an area 
fails to meet its RFP goal. Failure to meet any milestone year target 
prior to 2014 would have required California to implement RFP 
contingency measures in the South Coast and to revise the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan to assure that it still provided for attainment 
by the applicable attainment date of December 31, 2015. In this case, 
however, the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 Supplement demonstrate 
that actual emission levels in the years leading up to 2014 were 
consistent with RFP for direct PM2.5 and all four precursor 
pollutants (NOX, SOX, VOC and ammonia) regulated 
in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan. Accordingly, RFP contingency 
measures no longer have meaning or purpose, and therefore EPA proposes 
to find that the requirement for them is now moot.

J. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
    CAA section 176(c) requires Federal actions in nonattainment and 
maintenance areas to conform to the SIP's goals of eliminating or 
reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and 
achieving expeditious attainment of the standards. Conformity to the 
SIP's goals means that such actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute 
to violations of a NAAQS, (2) worsen the severity of an existing 
violation, or (3) delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any interim 
milestone.
    Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal 
Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to the 
EPA's transportation conformity rule, codified at 40 CFR part 93, 
subpart A. Under this rule, MPOs in nonattainment and maintenance areas 
coordinate with state and local air quality and transportation 
agencies, the EPA, FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that an area's RTP and 
transportation improvement program (TIP) conform to the applicable SIP. 
This demonstration is typically done by showing that estimated 
emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are 
less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) 
contained in all control strategy SIPs. An attainment, maintenance, or 
RFP SIP should include budgets for the attainment year, each required 
RFP year, or the last year of the maintenance plan, as appropriate. 
Budgets are generally established for specific years and specific 
pollutants or precursors and must reflect all of the motor vehicle 
control measures contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations (40 
CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v)).
    PM2.5 plans should identify motor vehicle emission 
budgets for direct PM2.5 and all significant 
PM2.5 precursors for each RFP milestone year and the 
attainment year, if the plan demonstrates attainment. All direct 
PM2.5 SIP budgets should include direct PM2.5 
motor vehicle emissions from tailpipe, brake wear, and tire wear. A 
state must also consider whether re-entrained paved and unpaved road 
dust or highway and transit construction dust are significant 
contributors and should be included in the direct PM2.5 
budget. See 40 CFR 93.102(b) and 93.122(f) and the conformity rule 
preamble at 69 FR 40004, 40031-40036 (July 1, 2004).
2. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan 
and 2015 Supplement
    The 2015 Supplement revised the attainment demonstration in the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan to identify December 31, 2015 as the 
applicable attainment date, and included revised budgets for 2015 for 
directly emitted PM2.5, NOX, and VOC. See 2015 
Supplement, Attachment C, Table C-1. These budgets reflect average 
annual daily emissions and are calculated using EMFAC2011, the 
currently approved mobile source emission model for California, and 
transportation activity from SCAG's adopted 2012 Regional 
Transportation Plan (RTP), consistent with the methodology for 
developing the emissions inventories used in the attainment 
demonstration. Reductions from incentive measures were removed from the 
budgets, and off-model reductions for reformulated gasoline (RFG) and 
SmogCheck (California's inspection and maintenance program) which were 
not in EMFAC2011 were included in the budgets, consistent with

[[Page 63656]]

the emissions inventory used in the attainment demonstration.
    The direct PM2.5 budgets included tailpipe, brake wear, 
and tire wear emissions as well as paved and unpaved road dust and road 
construction dust. No budgets for SO2 were included in the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan or 2015 Supplement because on-road emissions 
of SO2 are a small part (11 percent) of the total 
SO2 inventory. No budgets for ammonia were included in the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan or 2015 Supplement.
3. Conclusion and Proposed Actions
    We are not acting on the motor vehicle emission budgets for direct 
PM2.5, NOX, and VOC in the 2012 PM2.5 
Plan or 2015 Supplement. We previously approved motor vehicle emissions 
budgets for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards (76 
FR 69928, 69951 (November 9, 2011)), and these budgets will continue to 
apply in the South Coast for transportation conformity purposes for 
these standards. The same budgets will also continue to apply for the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard until we finalize our approval 
of new budgets in the Serious area plan for the 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS or find those budgets adequate.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ In 2012, the EPA revised the annual PM2.5 
standard, lowering its level from 15 [micro]g/m\3\ to 12 [micro]g/
m\3\ (78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). We finalized designations for 
the 2012 standard in December, 2014 and these designations became 
effective April 15, 2015. See 80 FR 2206, January 15, 2015. For 
purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 standard, the regional 
conformity test requirements for all nonattainment and maintenance 
areas in 40 CFR 93.109 will apply one year after the effective date 
of EPA's nonattainment designations in accordance with section 
93.102(d) and until the effective date of revocation of such NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. General Conformity Budgets

1. Requirements for General Conformity
    Conformity is required under CAA section 176(c) to ensure that 
federal actions are consistent with (``conform to'') the purpose of the 
SIP. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that federal activities 
will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, 
or delay timely attainment of the relevant NAAQS or interim reductions 
and milestones. Conformity applies to areas that are designated 
nonattainment and to maintenance areas.
    Section 176(c)(4) of the CAA establishes the framework for general 
conformity. The EPA first promulgated general conformity regulations in 
November 1993 (40 CFR part 51, subpart W, 40 CFR part 93, subpart B). 
Subsequently we revised the general conformity regulations on April 5, 
2010 (75 FR 17254). Besides ensuring that federal actions not covered 
by the transportation conformity rule will not interfere with the SIP, 
the general conformity regulations encourage consultation between the 
federal agency and the state or local air pollution control agencies 
before and during the environmental review process, as well as public 
notification of and access to federal agency conformity determinations, 
and allows for air quality review of individual federal actions.
    The general conformity regulations provides three phases: (A) 
Applicability analysis, (B) conformity determination, and (C) review 
process. The applicability analysis phase under 40 CFR 93.153 is used 
to find if a Federal action requires a conformity determination for a 
specific pollutant. If a conformity determination is needed, Federal 
agencies can use one of several methods to show that the project 
conforms to the SIP. In an area without a State Implementation Plan 
(SIP), a federal action may be shown to ``conform'' by demonstrating 
there will be no net increase in emission in the nonattainment or 
maintenance area from the Federal action.
    In an area with a SIP, conformity to the applicable SIP can be 
demonstrated in one of several ways. For actions where the direct and 
indirect emissions exceeds the rates in 40 CFR 93.153(b), the federal 
action can include mitigation efforts to bring emissions to levels 
below the thresholds or can show that the action will conform by 
meeting any of the following requirements:
     By showing that the net emission increases caused by an 
action are included in the SIP,
     by documenting that the State agrees to include the 
emission increases in the SIP,
     through offsetting the action's emissions in the same or 
nearby area of equal or greater classification, or
     through an air quality modeling demonstration in some 
circumstances.
    The general conformity regulations at 40 CFR 93.161 allow state and 
local air quality agencies working with federal agencies with large 
facilities (e.g., commercial airports, ports and large military bases) 
that are subject to the general conformity regulations to develop and 
adopt an emissions budget for those facilities in order to facilitate 
future conformity determinations. Such a budget, referred to as a 
facility-wide emission budget, may be used by federal agencies to 
demonstrate conformity as long as the total facility-wide budget level 
identified in the SIP is not exceeded.
    According to 40 CFR 93.161, the state or local agency responsible 
for implementing and enforcing the SIP can develop and adopt an 
emissions budget to be used for demonstrating conformity under 40 CFR 
93.158(a)(1). The facility-wide budget must (1) be for a set time 
period; (2) cover the pollutants or precursors of the pollutants for 
which the area is designated nonattainment or maintenance; (3) the 
budgets are specific about what can be emitted on an annual or seasonal 
basis; (4) the emissions from the facility along with all other 
emissions in the area will not exceed the total SIP emissions budget 
for the nonattainment or maintenance area; (5) specific measures are 
included to ensure compliance with the facility-wide budget, such as 
periodic reporting requirements or compliance demonstrations when the 
Federal agency is taking an action that would otherwise require a 
conformity determination; (6) the budget must be submitted to EPA as a 
SIP revision; and (7) the SIP revision must be approved by EPA. Having 
or using a facility-wide emissions budget does not preclude a Federal 
agency from demonstrating conformity in any other manner allowed by the 
conformity rule.
2. General Conformity Budget in the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement
    The 2012 PM2.5 Plan addresses general conformity 
beginning on page II-2-52 of Appendix III. The District identified the 
de minimis thresholds for general conformity in the South Coast as 10 
tpy of VOC and NOX because of its designation and 
classification as a severe ozone nonattainment area, and 100 tpy of 
PM2.5 because of its designation and classification as a 
moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area. The District examined 
historical records and noted that projects requiring general conformity 
determinations had historically not exceeded the PM2.5 de 
minimis levels. The main pollutant of concern during project 
construction was NOX, and to a lesser extent, VOC. To 
streamline the general conformity process for projects and to 
facilitate general conformity determinations, VOC and NOX 
general conformity budgets of 1 tpd of NOX and 0.2 tpd of 
VOC were established on an annual basis from 2013 to 2030. These 
general conformity budgets will be tracked via a tracking system that 
the District sets up for projects subject to general conformity 
determinations. The District will count project emissions towards the 
applicable general conformity budget until the budget has been 
exhausted. Any unused portions will not carry forward from year to 
year. Once the

[[Page 63657]]

budget is exhausted, federal projects can still demonstrate conformity 
using other provisions in the conformity rule.
3. Evaluation and Proposed Action
    We propose to approve the general conformity budgets in the 2012 
PM2.5 Plan for NOX and VOC for 2013 to 2030 as 
meeting the requirements of the CAA and the general conformity rule. If 
we finalize our approval of these budgets, Federal agencies can use 
these budgets to demonstrate that their projects conform to the SIP 
through a letter from the state and District confirming that the 
project emissions are accounted for in the SIP's general conformity 
budgets. The District will be responsible for tracking emissions from 
all projects against the budgets. Once the budgets are used, future 
federal projects will need to demonstrate conformity using a different 
method. Any federal projects that emit criteria pollutants or pollutant 
precursors other than those for which general conformity budgets are 
established will still need to demonstrate conformity for those 
pollutants or precursors.

V. Proposed Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Serious Area 
SIP Requirements

A. Proposed Reclassification as Serious and Applicable Attainment Date

    Section 188 of the Act outlines the process for classification of 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas and establishes the applicable 
attainment dates. Under the plain meaning of the terms of section 
188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA has general authority to reclassify at 
any time before the applicable attainment date any area that the EPA 
determines cannot practicably attain the standard by such date. 
Accordingly, section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of 
delegated rulemaking authority. In addition, subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
of section 188(b)(1) mandate that the EPA reclassify ``appropriate'' 
PM10 nonattainment areas at specified time frames (i.e., by 
December 31, 1991 for the initial PM10 nonattainment areas, 
and within 18 months after the SIP submittal due date for subsequent 
nonattainment areas). These subparagraphs do not restrict the EPA's 
general authority but simply specify that, at a minimum, it must be 
exercised at certain times.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ For a general discussion of EPA's interpretation of the 
reclassification provisions in section 188(b)(1) of the Act, see the 
General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 at 13537-38 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have reviewed recent PM2.5 monitoring data for the 
South Coast available in the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. 
These data show that 24-hour PM2.5 levels in the South Coast 
continue to be above 35 [micro]g/m\3\, the level of the 2006 
PM2.5 standard, and the recent trends in the South Coast's 
24-hour PM2.5 levels are not consistent with a projection of 
attainment by the end of 2015. (See Memorandum dated August 21, 2015, 
Michael Flagg, US EPA Region 9, Air Quality Analysis Office).
    In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is 
proposing to reclassify the South Coast area from Moderate to Serious 
nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 
[micro]g/m\3\, based on the EPA's determination that the South Coast 
area cannot practicably attain this standard by the applicable 
attainment date of December 31, 2015.
    Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a 
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's 
designation as nonattainment. . . .'' The South Coast area was 
designated nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 standard 
effective December 14, 2009.\62\ Therefore, upon final reclassification 
of the South Coast area as a Serious nonattainment area, the latest 
permissible attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, for 
purposes of the 2006 PM2.5 standard in this area, will be 
December 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Under section 188(e) of the Act, a state may apply to EPA for a 
single extension of the Serious area attainment date by up to 5 years, 
which the EPA may grant if the State satisfies certain conditions. 
Before the EPA may extend the attainment date for a Serious area under 
section 188(e), the State must: (1) Apply for an extension of the 
attainment date beyond the statutory attainment date; (2) demonstrate 
that attainment by the statutory attainment date is impracticable; (3) 
have complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the 
area in the implementation plan; (4) demonstrate to the satisfaction of 
the Administrator that the plan for the area includes the most 
stringent measures that are included in the implementation plan of any 
State or are achieved in practice in any State, and can feasibly be 
implemented in the area; and (5) submit a demonstration of attainment 
by the most expeditious alternative date practicable.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ For a discussion of EPA's interpretation of the 
requirements of section 188(e), see ``State Implementation Plans for 
Serious PM10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date 
Waivers for PM10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum 
to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994) 
(hereafter ``Addendum'') at 42002; 65 FR 19964 (April 13, 2000) 
(proposed action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, 
Arizona); 66 FR 50252 (October 2, 2001) (proposed action on 
PM10 Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona); 67 FR 48718 
(July 25, 2002) (final action on PM10 Plan for Maricopa 
County, Arizona); and Vigil v. EPA, 366 F.3d 1025, amended at 381 
F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) (remanding EPA action on PM10 
Plan for Maricopa County, Arizona but generally upholding EPA's 
interpretation of CAA section 188(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious PM2.5 
Nonattainment Area Plans

    Upon reclassification as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS, California will be required to submit 
additional SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory requirements that 
apply to Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including the 
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
    The Serious area SIP elements that California will be required to 
submit are as follows:
    1. Provisions to assure that the best available control measures 
(BACM), including best available control technology (BACT) for 
stationary sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and 
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years 
after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
    2. a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan 
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than December 31, 2019, or where the State is seeking an extension of 
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that 
attainment by December 31, 2019 is impracticable and that the plan 
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date 
practicable and no later than December 31, 2024 (CAA sections 188(c)(2) 
and 189(b)(1)(A));
    3. plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP) 
(CAA 172(c)(2));
    4. quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years 
until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate RFP 
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
    5. provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to 
major stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to major 
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the 
state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not 
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the 
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
    6. a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions 
from all

[[Page 63658]]

sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the area 
(CAA section 172(c)(3));
    7. contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet 
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section 
172(c)(9)); and
    8. A revision to the nonattainment new source review (NSR) program 
to lower the applicable ``major stationary source'' \64\ thresholds 
from 100 tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 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 tons per year of 
PM10 (CAA sections 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Final reclassification of the South Coast area as Serious 
nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 standard may also lower the 
de minimis threshold under the CAA's General Conformity requirements 
(40 CFR part 93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy for PM2.5 
and PM2.5 precursors. See 80 FR 15339 at 15441.
    In March of 2015, the EPA issued a proposed rulemaking to provide 
guidance to states on the attainment planning requirements in subparts 
1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act that apply to areas designated 
nonattainment for PM2.5.\65\ In the interim, before the 
PM2.5 implementation rule is finalized, the EPA encourages 
the State to review the proposed rulemaking as well as the General 
Preamble and Addendum for guidance on how to implement these statutory 
requirements in the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment 
area.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See 80 FR 15339, ``Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements,'' 
March 23, 2015.
    \66\ See generally the General Preamble, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 
1992) and Addendum, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Statutory Deadline for Submittal of the Serious Area Plan

    For an area reclassified as a Serious nonattainment area before the 
applicable attainment date under CAA section 188(b)(1), section 
189(b)(2) requires the State to submit the required BACM provisions 
``no later than 18 months after reclassification of the area as a 
Serious Area'' and to submit the required attainment demonstration ``no 
later than 4 years after reclassification of the area to Serious.'' 
Section 189(b)(2) establishes outer bounds on the SIP submission 
deadlines and does not preclude the EPA's establishment of earlier 
deadlines as necessary or appropriate to assure consistency among the 
required submissions and to implement the statutory requirements.
    If a final reclassification of the South Coast PM2.5 
nonattainment area to Serious becomes effective by early 2016, the Act 
provides the State with up to 18 months after this date (i.e., until 
mid-2017) to submit the required BACM provisions. Because an up-to-date 
emissions inventory serves as the foundation for a state's BACM and 
BACT determinations, the EPA also proposes to require the State to 
submit the emissions inventory required under CAA section 172(c)(3) 
within 18 months after the effective date of final reclassification. 
Similarly, because an effective evaluation of BACM and BACT measures 
requires evaluation of the precursor pollutants that must be controlled 
to provide for expeditious attainment in the area, if the State chooses 
to submit an optional precursor insignificance demonstration to support 
a determination to exclude a PM2.5 precursor from the 
required control measure evaluations for the area, the EPA proposes to 
require the State to submit any such demonstration by this same date. 
An 18-month timeframe for submission of these plan elements is 
consistent with both the timeframe for submission of BACM provisions 
under CAA section 189(b)(2) and the timeframe for submission of subpart 
1 plan elements under section 172(b) of the Act.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ Section 172(b) requires the EPA to establish, concurrent 
with nonattainment area designations, a schedule extending no later 
than 3 years from the date of the nonattainment designation for 
states to submit plans or plan revisions meeting the applicable 
requirements of sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA proposes to require the State to submit the attainment 
demonstration required under section 189(b)(1)(A) and the remaining 
attainment-related plan elements no later than three years after the 
effective date of final reclassification or by December 31, 2018, 
whichever is earlier. The attainment-related plan elements that we 
propose to require within the same 3-year timeframe as the attainment 
demonstration are: (1) The RFP demonstration required under section 
172(c)(2); (2) the quantitative milestones required under section 
189(c); (3) any additional control measures necessary to meet the 
requirements of section 172(c)(6); and (4) the contingency measures 
required under section 172(c)(9). Although section 189(b)(2) generally 
provides for up to 4 years after a discretionary reclassification for 
the State to submit the required attainment demonstration, it is 
appropriate in this case for the EPA to establish an earlier SIP 
submission deadline to assure timely implementation of the statutory 
requirements.
    The EPA designated the South Coast area as nonattainment for the 
2006 PM2.5 standard effective December 14, 2009.\68\ On 
January 4, 2013, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision 
in NRDC remanding EPA's 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule and 
directing the EPA to repromulgate it in accordance with the 
requirements of subpart 4.\69\ In response to the NRDC decision, the 
EPA undertook a rulemaking to classify all PM2.5 
nonattainment areas as Moderate nonattainment and begin implementing 
the PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4. Effective July 2, 2014, the 
EPA classified all areas previously designated nonattainment for the 
1997 and/or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as Moderate nonattainment under 
subpart 4 and established a December 31, 2014 deadline for states to 
submit Moderate area SIP elements required for these areas.\70\ These 
unusual circumstances have significantly shortened the timeframes 
ordinarily allowed under the Act for the EPA and the states to address 
the statutory SIP requirements following reclassification of an area 
from Moderate to Serious nonattainment under subpart 4.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009).
    \69\ NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
    \70\ 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014). The EPA notes that some states 
had already made SIP submissions intended to meet applicable 
nonattainment plan requirements as interpreted in the remanded 2007 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule. Accordingly, the new SIP 
submission deadline provided the opportunity for states to revise or 
supplement their prior submissions, as necessary or appropriate to 
meet subpart 4 requirements.
    \71\ For areas designated nonattainment after November 15, 1990, 
section 188(b)(1)(B) of the Act requires that the EPA ``reclassify 
appropriate areas within 18 months after the required date for the 
State's submission of a SIP for the Moderate Area.'' Read together 
with section 189(a)(2)(B), which requires states to submit Moderate 
Area plans within 18 months after nonattainment designations, 
section 188(b)(1)(B) generally contemplates that EPA would 
reclassify appropriate areas as Serious nonattainment no later than 
36 months (3 years) after initial nonattainment designations. Under 
these circumstances, the required Serious area attainment 
demonstration would normally be submitted no later than 7 years 
after initial designation (4 years after reclassification), which is 
3 years before the latest permissible attainment date under CAA 
section 188(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposal to require the State to submit the attainment 
demonstration and other attainment-related plan elements no later than 
three years after reclassification or by December 31, 2018, whichever 
is earlier, is supported by the overall structure and purpose of the 
attainment planning requirements in part D, title I of the Act. Section 
188(b)(1) provides the EPA with discretionary authority to reclassify 
an area as Serious nonattainment at any time before the applicable 
attainment date, based on a determination that the

[[Page 63659]]

area cannot practicably attain the NAAQS by the Moderate area 
attainment date. Under normal circumstances, where the EPA reclassifies 
an area within 3 years after its designation as nonattainment, as 
contemplated in CAA section 188(b)(1)(B),\72\ the required BACM 
provisions would be due no later than 18 months after reclassification 
(i.e., no later than 4.5 years after designation) and the required 
attainment demonstration would be due no later than 4 years after 
reclassification (i.e., no later than 7 years after designation).\73\ 
In these circumstances, the Serious area attainment demonstration would 
be due at least 3 years before the outermost Serious area attainment 
date for the area,\74\ thus providing the EPA with sufficient time to 
evaluate the submitted plan well in advance of the statutory attainment 
date. However, in situations such as this, where the EPA reclassifies 
an area pursuant to its discretionary reclassification authority later 
than 3 years after the area's designation as nonattainment, it is 
appropriate for the EPA to consider the outermost Serious area 
attainment date applicable to the area in setting a deadline for the 
State to submit the required elements of the Serious area attainment 
plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ Id.
    \73\ CAA section 189(b)(2). By contrast, for an area that is 
reclassified as Serious by operation of law after the applicable 
attainment date, which may be as late as the end of the 6th year 
after the area's designation as nonattainment (CAA section 
188(b)(1)), the state must submit both the BACM provisions and the 
Serious area attainment demonstration no later than 18 months after 
reclassification. Id.
    \74\ Under CAA section 188(c)(2), the latest permissible 
attainment date for a Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area is 
no later than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the 
area's designation as nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon reclassification as Serious, the South Coast PM2.5 
nonattainment area will be subject to a Serious area attainment date no 
later than December 31, 2019.\75\ Sections 189(b)(1)(A) and 189(c) of 
the Act require the State to submit a demonstration that the plan 
provides for attainment of the PM2.5 standard by this date, 
including quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 
years until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate 
reasonable further progress toward attainment by this date. If the EPA 
reclassifies the South Coast area effective in early 2016 and allows 
the State 4 years following reclassification (i.e., potentially until 
early 2020) to submit the attainment demonstration and related plan 
elements, these Serious area plan provisions would not be due until 
after the latest permissible statutory attainment date for the area 
(December 31, 2019) has come and gone. Thus, under such circumstances, 
allowing the maximum 4-year timeframe for submission of the required 
attainment demonstration and related plan elements would frustrate the 
statutory design and severely constrain the EPA's ability to ensure 
that the State is implementing the applicable statutory requirements in 
a timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, it is appropriate for the EPA to require California to 
submit the required attainment demonstration and other attainment-
related plan elements no later than 3 years after final 
reclassification or by December 31, 2018, whichever is earlier, so that 
the EPA has adequate time to review and act on the State's submission 
prior to the latest permissible attainment date for the area under 
section 188(c)(2), which is December 31, 2019. This timeframe for the 
required Serious area plan submissions is appropriate to assure 
consistency among the required submissions and to implement the 
statutory requirements in a timely manner.
    Finally, the EPA proposes to require that the State submit revised 
nonattainment NSR program requirements no later than 18 months after 
final reclassification. The Act does not specify a deadline for the 
State's submission of SIP revisions to meet nonattainment NSR program 
requirements to lower the ``major stationary source'' threshold from 
100 tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section 189(b)(3)) and to 
address the control requirements for major stationary sources of 
PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 189(e)) \76\ following 
reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area as 
Serious nonattainment under subpart 4. Pursuant to the EPA's gap-
filling authority in CAA section 301(a) and to effectuate the statutory 
control requirements in section 189 of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
require the State to submit these nonattainment NSR SIP revisions, as 
well as any necessary analysis of and additional control requirements 
for major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, no later 
than 18 months after the effective date of final reclassification of 
the South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 standard. This due date will ensure that necessary 
control requirements for major sources are established well in advance 
of the required attainment demonstration. An 18-month timeframe for 
submission of the NNSR SIP revisions also aligns with the statutory 
deadline for submission of BACM and BACT provisions and the broader 
analysis of PM2.5 precursors for potential controls on 
existing sources in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ Section 189(e) requires that the control requirements 
applicable to major stationary sources of PM2.5 also 
apply to major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, 
except where the state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that 
such sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5 
levels that exceed the standard in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country

    Seven Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the South 
Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area. These tribes are listed in 
Table 4 below.

 Table 4--Indian Tribes Located in South Coast PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cahuilla Band of Indians
Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation
Ramona Band of Cahuilla
San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians of the San Manuel Reservation
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have considered the relevance of our proposal to reclassify the 
South Coast area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 
standard to each tribe located within the South Coast area. We believe 
that the same facts and circumstances that support the proposal for the 
non-Indian country lands also support the proposal for reservation 
areas of Indian country \77\ and any other area of Indian country where 
the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction 
located within the South Coast nonattainment area. The EPA is therefore 
proposing to exercise our authority under CAA section 188(b)(1) to 
reclassify areas of Indian country geographically located in the South 
Coast nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly authorizes the EPA 
to reclassify a nonattainment area--including any Indian country 
located within such an area--that EPA

[[Page 63660]]

determines cannot practicably attain the relevant standard by the 
applicable attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to: 
``(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the 
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the 
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through 
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the 
borders of the United States whether within the original or 
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or 
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the 
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Directly-emitted PM2.5 and its precursor pollutants 
(NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia) are emitted 
throughout a nonattainment area and can be transported throughout that 
nonattainment area. Therefore, boundaries for nonattainment areas are 
drawn to encompass both areas with direct sources of the pollution 
problem as well as nearby areas in the same airshed. Initial 
classifications of nonattainment areas are coterminous with, that is, 
they match exactly, their boundaries. The EPA believes this approach 
best ensures public health protection from the adverse effects of 
PM2.5 pollution. Therefore, it is generally 
counterproductive from an air quality and planning perspective to have 
a disparate classification for a land area located within the 
boundaries of a nonattainment area, such as the reservation areas of 
Indian country contained within the South Coast PM2.5 
nonattainment area. Moreover, violations of the 2006 PM2.5 
standard, which are measured and modeled throughout the nonattainment 
area, as well as shared meteorological conditions, would dictate the 
same conclusion. Furthermore, emissions increases in portions of a 
PM2.5 nonattainment area that are left classified as 
Moderate could counteract the effects of efforts to attain the standard 
within the overall area because less stringent requirements would apply 
in those Moderate portions relative to those that would apply in the 
portions of the area reclassified to Serious.
    Uniformity of classification throughout a nonattainment area is 
thus a guiding principle and premise when an area is being 
reclassified. Equally, if the EPA believes it is likely that a given 
nonattainment area will not attain the PM2.5 standard by the 
applicable attainment date, then it may be an additional reason why it 
is appropriate to maintain a uniform classification within the area and 
thus to reclassify the reservation areas of Indian country and any 
other area where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has 
jurisdiction together with the balance of the nonattainment area. In 
this particular case, we are proposing to determine, based on the 
State's demonstration and current ambient air quality trends, that the 
South Coast nonattainment area cannot practicably attain the 2006 
PM2.5 standard by its applicable Moderate area attainment 
date of December 31, 2015.
    In light of the considerations outlined above that support 
retention of a uniformly-classified PM2.5 nonattainment 
area, and our finding that it is impracticable for the area to attain 
by the applicable attainment date, we propose to reclassify the areas 
of Indian country within the South Coast nonattainment area as Serious 
nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 standard.
    The effect of reclassification would be to lower the applicable 
``major source'' threshold for purposes of the nonattainment new source 
review program and the Title V operating permit program from its 
current level of 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 
501(2)(B)), thus subjecting more new or modified stationary sources to 
these requirements. The reclassification may also lower the de minimis 
threshold under the CAA's General Conformity requirements (40 CFR part 
93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under the General Conformity 
requirements, Federal agencies bear the responsibility of determining 
conformity of actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas that 
require Federal permits, approvals, or funding. Such permits, approvals 
or funding by Federal agencies for projects in these areas of Indian 
country may be more difficult to obtain because of the lower de minimis 
thresholds.
    Given the potential implications of the reclassification, the EPA 
has contacted tribal officials to invite government-to-government 
consultation on this rulemaking effort.\78\ The EPA specifically 
solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from tribal 
officials. We note that although eligible tribes may seek EPA approval 
of relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes 
will be required to submit an implementation plan to address this 
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ We sent letters to seven tribal officials regarding 
government-to-government consultation on September 4, 2015 and 
September 30, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Summary of Proposed Actions and Request for Public Comment

    Under CAA section 110(k)(3), the EPA is proposing to approve the 
following elements of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan and 2015 
Supplement submitted by California to address the CAA's Moderate area 
planning requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South 
Coast nonattainment area:
    1. The 2008 base year emissions inventories as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
    2. the reasonably available control measures/reasonably available 
control technology demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C);
    3. the reasonable further progress demonstration as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2);
    4. the demonstration that attainment by the Moderate area 
attainment date of December 31, 2015 is impracticable as meeting the 
requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii); and
    5. SCAQMD's commitments to adopt and implement specific rules and 
measures in accordance with the schedule provided in Chapter 4 of the 
2012 PM2.5 Plan, as revised by Table F-1 of Attachment F of 
the 2015 Supplement, to achieve the emissions reductions shown therein, 
and to submit these rules and measures to ARB for transmittal to EPA as 
a revision to the SIP, as stated on pp. 7-8 of SCAQMD Governing Board 
Resolution 12-19.
    In addition, the EPA is proposing to approve the general conformity 
budgets for NOX and VOC for years 2013-2030 listed in 
Appendix III, p. III-2-53 of the 2012 PM2.5 Plan as meeting 
the requirements of the CAA and the general conformity rule.
    Finally, pursuant to CAA section 188(b)(1), the EPA is proposing to 
reclassify the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area, 
including the reservation areas of Indian country and any other area 
where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction 
within the South Coast area, as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 standard based on the agency's determination that the 
South Coast area cannot practicably attain the standard by the Moderate 
area attainment date of December 31, 2015. Upon final reclassification 
as a Serious area, California will be required to submit, within 18 
months after the effective date of the reclassification, provisions to 
assure that BACM shall be implemented no later than 4 years after the 
date of reclassification and to submit, within 3 years after the 
effective date of reclassification or by December 31, 2018, which is 
sooner, a Serious area plan that satisfies the requirements of part D 
of title I of the Act. This plan must include a demonstration that the 
South Coast area will attain the 2006 PM2.5 standard as 
expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2019, or by 
the most expeditious alternative date practicable and no later than 
December 31, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of CAA sections 
189(b) and 188(e).
    In addition, because the EPA is proposing to similarly reclassify 
reservation areas of Indian country and any other area of Indian 
country where EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the

[[Page 63661]]

tribe has jurisdiction within the South Coast PM2.5 
nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 standard, consistent with our proposed 
reclassification of the surrounding non-Indian country lands, the EPA 
has invited consultation with interested tribes concerning this issue. 
We note that although eligible tribes may seek the EPA's approval of 
relevant tribal programs under the CAA, none of the affected tribes 
will be required to submit an implementation plan to address this 
reclassification.
    We will accept comments from the public on these proposals for the 
next 30 days. The deadline and instructions for submission of comments 
are provided in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of 
this preamble.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA because it does not contain any information collection 
activities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This 
proposed action would approve State law as meeting Federal requirements 
and would not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by 
State law. Additionally, the proposed rule would reclassify the South 
Coast nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS, and would not itself regulate small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more as described in UMRA, and does not significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments. This proposed action would approve State law 
as meeting Federal requirements and would not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Additionally, the 
proposed action would reclassify the South Coast nonattainment area as 
Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and would 
not itself impose any federal intergovernmental mandate. The proposed 
action would not require any tribes to submit implementation plans.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that 
have Tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and 
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal government and Indian Tribes.''
    Seven Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the South 
Coast nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The 
Cahuilla Band of Indians, the Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, 
the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga 
Reservation, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, the San Manuel Band of 
Serrano Mission Indians of the San Manuel Reservation, the Santa Rosa 
Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians.
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The EPA has concluded that this proposed rule might have tribal 
implications for the purposes of Executive Order 13175, but would not 
impose substantial direct costs upon the tribes, nor would it preempt 
Tribal law. We note that only one of the tribes located in the South 
Coast nonattainment area (the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians 
of the Pechanga Reservation) has requested eligibility to administer 
programs under the CAA. The proposed rule would affect the EPA's 
implementation of the new source review program because of the lower 
``major source'' threshold triggered by reclassification (70 tons per 
year for direct PM2.5 and precursors to PM2.5). 
The proposed rule may also affect new or modified stationary sources 
proposed in these areas that require Federal permits, approvals, or 
funding. Such projects are subject to the requirements of EPA's General 
Conformity rule, and Federal permits, approvals, or funding for the 
projects may be more difficult to obtain because of the lower de 
minimis thresholds triggered by reclassification.
    Given the potential implications, the EPA contacted tribal 
officials during the process of developing this proposed rule to 
provide an opportunity to have meaningful and timely input into its 
development. On September 4, 2015, we sent letters to leaders of the 
seven tribes with areas of Indian country in the South Coast 
nonattainment area inviting government-to-government consultation on 
the rulemaking effort. We requested that the tribal leaders, or their 
designated consultation representatives, provide input or request 
government-to-government consultation by October 4, 2015. We intend to 
continue communicating with all seven tribes located within the 
boundaries of the South Coast nonattainment area for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS as we move forward in developing a final rule. 
The EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule 
from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This proposed action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it would approve a state 
action implementing a federal standard, and reclassify the South Coast 
nonattainment area as Serious

[[Page 63662]]

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, triggering Serious 
area planning requirements under the CAA. This proposed action does not 
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or 
safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    The EPA has determined that this action will not have potential 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. This proposed action would only approve a state action 
implementing a federal standard, and reclassify the South Coast 
nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS, triggering additional Serious area planning 
requirements under the CAA.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: September 30, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2015-26315 Filed 10-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


