[Federal Register: December 17, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 242)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 77212-77220]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17de02-17]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[CA-274-0371; FRL-7422-4]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans and
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California--
South Coast
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of California to provide for
attainment of the particulate matter (PM-10) national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area
and to establish emissions budgets for purposes of transportation
conformity. EPA is also proposing to grant the State's request for an
extension of the PM-10 attainment deadline to December 31, 2006. EPA is
proposing to approve the SIP revisions under provisions of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national
primary and secondary ambient air quality standards, and plan
requirements for nonattainment areas.
DATES: Written comments on this proposal must be received by January
16, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Please mail comments to: Dave Jesson (AIR-2), EPA Region IX,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. The rulemaking
docket for this notice is available for public inspection during normal
business hours at EPA's Region IX office. A
[[Page 77213]]
reasonable fee may be charged for copying parts of the docket.
Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the following locations:
California Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California,
95812
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California, 91765-0932
Most of the plan materials are also electronically available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp
.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Jesson, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3957, or jesson.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Summary
B. PM-10 Problem in the South Coast
C. CAA Provisions
D. Designation and Classification
E. Adoption and Submittal
II. Evaluation of the SIP Submittals
A. Emission Inventories
B. Control Measures
1. Applicable Requirements
2. Description of Control Measures
3. Proposed Action on Control Measures
C. Contingency Measures
D. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestones
E. Attainment Demonstration
F. Extension of the Attainment Deadline
G. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
III. Summary of the Proposed Action
IV. Administrative Requirements
I. Background
A. Summary
We are proposing to approve portions of the 1994 and 1997 plans,
the 1998 and 1999 plan amendments, and the 2002 status report for the
South Coast Air Basin (or ``South Coast''), as these SIP submittals
pertain to PM-10, and to grant the State's request that the attainment
date for the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS be extended from December
31, 2001, to December 31, 2006.\1\ We are also proposing to approve
emissions budgets for purposes of transportation conformity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The nonattainment area includes all of Orange County and the
more populated portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and
Riverside Counties. For a description of the boundaries of the Los
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. PM-10 Problem in the South Coast Air Basin
Although great progress has been made in reducing PM-10
concentrations, the South Coast continues to violate both the 24-hour
and annual PM-10 NAAQS, and the State must therefore submit measures
and other provisions sufficient to make expeditious progress and attain
the NAAQS.\2\ The South Coast PM-10 plans were prepared to meet
applicable CAA provisions, including attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS
throughout the basin. Preparation of these plans was particularly
challenging because PM-10 concentrations in the South Coast consist of
both primary particulate (such as road dust and diesel soot, emitted
directly into the atmosphere) and secondary particulate (particles
formed through atmospheric chemical reactions from precursor gases,
notably oxides of nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, and ammonia), and the
principal causes of PM-10 violations show a strong spatial variation
within the South Coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter on July 1, 1987
(52 FR 24672), replacing standards for total suspended particulates
with new standards applying only to particulate matter up to 10
microns in diameter (PM-10). At that time, EPA established two PM-10
standards. The annual PM-10 standard is attained when the expected
annual arithmetic mean of the 24-hour samples averaged over a 3-year
period does not exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). The
24-hour PM-10 standard of 150 ug/m3 is attained if samples taken for
24-hour periods have no more than one expected exceedance per year,
averaged over 3 years. See 40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR part 50, appendix
K.
On July 18, 1997, EPA reaffirmed the annual PM-10 standard, and
slightly revised the 24-hour PM-10 standard (62 FR 38651). In the
same action, EPA also established two new standards for PM, both
applying only to particulate matter up to 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM-2.5).
This SIP submittal addresses the 24-hour and annual PM-10
standards as originally promulgated. An opinion issued by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in American Trucking Assoc.,
Inc., et al. v. USEPA, No. 97-1440 (May 14, 1999), among other
things, vacated the new standards for PM-10 that were published on
July 18, 1997 and became effective September 16, 1997. However, the
PM-10 standards promulgated on July 1, 1987 were not an issue in
this litigation, and the Court's decision noes not affect the
applicability of those standards in this area. Codification of those
standards continues to be recorded at 40 CFR 50.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The health effects from elevated PM-10 concentrations include lung
damage, increased respiratory disease, and premature death. Children,
the elderly, and people suffering from heart and lung disease, such as
asthma, are especially at risk.
C. CAA Provisions
Title I of the Federal CAA was substantially amended in 1990 to
establish new planning requirements and attainment deadlines for the
NAAQS. The nonattainment area plan provisions for PM-10 areas appear in
CAA section 189. The most fundamental of these provisions is the
requirement that the State submit a SIP demonstrating attainment of the
PM-10 NAAQS. CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) and 189(b)(1)(A). This
demonstration must be based upon enforceable measures to achieve
emission reductions leading to emissions at or below the level
predicted to result in attainment of the NAAQS throughout the
nonattainment area. For areas classified as serious, such as the South
Coast, the measures must meet the standard for Best Available Control
Measures (BACM), and the measures must be implemented expeditiously and
ensure attainment no later than the applicable CAA deadline. Because
the State requests an extension of the attainment date beyond the
applicable deadline of December 31, 2001, CAA section 188(e) provides
that the State must demonstrate that the plan includes the most
stringent measures (MSM) that are included in any implementation plan
or are achieved in practice, and can feasibly be implemented in the
area.
EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing the Agency's
preliminary views on how EPA intends to act on SIPs submitted under
Title I of the Act. See 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992), 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992). EPA later issued an Addendum to the General Preamble
providing guidance on SIP requirements for serious PM-10 areas. 59 FR
41998 (August 16, 1994). The reader should refer to these documents for
a more detailed discussion of EPA's preliminary interpretations of
Title I requirements. In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA applies
these policies to the South Coast PM-10 SIP submittals, taking into
consideration the specific factual issues presented.
D. Designation and Classification
On the date of enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments, PM-10 areas,
including the South Coast Air Basin, meeting the qualifications of
section 107(d)(4)(B) of the amended Act, were designated nonattainment
by operation of law. See 56 FR 11101 (March 15, 1991).
Once an area is designated nonattainment, section 188 of the CAA
outlines the process for classification of the area and establishes the
area's attainment date. In accordance with section 188(a), at the time
of designation, all PM-10 nonattainment areas, including the South
Coast Air Basin, were initially classified as moderate by operation of
law. Section 188(b)(1) of the Act further provides that moderate areas
can subsequently be reclassified as serious before the applicable
moderate area attainment date if at any time EPA determines that the
area cannot ``practicably'' attain the PM-10 NAAQS by this attainment
date.
[[Page 77214]]
EPA determined on January 8, 1993, that the South Coast could not
practicably attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable attainment
deadline for moderate areas (December 31, 1994, per section 188(c)(1)
of the Act), and reclassified the area as serious (58 FR 3334). In
accordance with section 189(b)(2) of the Act, the applicable deadline
for submittal of SIPs for the South Coast addressing the requirements
for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas in section 189(b) and (c) of the
Act were:
(1) August 8, 1994 (18 months after the effective date of the
reclassification)--SIP to ensure the implementation of BACM no later
than 4 years after reclassification;
(2) February 8, 1997 (4 years after the effective date of the
reclassification)--SIP to provide for progress and expeditious
attainment.
The 1994 PM10 plan addresses the first requirement and the 1997
plan addresses the second requirement.
E. Adoption and Submittal
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopted
the 1994 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on September 9, 1994, and
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted the plan to us on
November 15, 1994. This plan addresses the BACM provisions of CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ SCAQMD adopted and CARB submitted in 1991 an AQMP intended,
in part, to satisfy the CAA section 189(a) provisions for PM-10
nonattainment areas classified as moderate. We did not take action
on this plan and are not doing so now, since the plan was superseded
by the subsequent SIP submittals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SCAQMD adopted the 1997 AQMP on November 15, 1996, and CARB
submitted the plan on February 5, 1997. This plan addresses the
remaining plan provisions for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas, as
specified in CAA sections 188 and 189.
In addition to PM-10, these two AQMPs address carbon monoxide (CO),
ozone, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).\4\ By operation of law pursuant to
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the PM-10 portions of the 1994 and 1997 plan
submittals became complete 6 months after submittal by the State--i.e.,
on May 15, 1995, and August 5, 1997, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ We granted interim approval to the CO portion of the 1997
submittal on April 21, 1998 (63 FR 19661), and we approved the NO2
portion of the 1997 submittal on July 24, 1998 (63 FR 39747). On
January 8, 1997 (62 FR 1150), we approved the ozone portion of the
1994 submittal. On April 10, 2000 (65 FR 18903), we approved the
ozone portion of the 1997 submittal, as amended in December 1999, as
a replacement for the 1994 ozone plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 10, 1998, the SCAQMD adopted a 1998 amendment to the 1997
plan, establishing 2010 and 2020 PM-10 motor vehicle emission budgets.
The State submitted these budgets to us as a SIP revision on April 22,
1998, and this submittal became complete by operation of law on October
22, 1998.
On December 10, 1999, the SCAQMD adopted a 1999 amendment to the
1997 plan, primarily addressing the ozone elements of the plan but also
affecting some control measures relating to PM-10. CARB submitted the
1999 amendment on February 4, 2000. On March 15, 2000, we found that
the 1999 amendment met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V.
On June 7, 2002, the SCAQMD adopted and on November 18, 2002, CARB
submitted a status report, including motor vehicle emissions budgets
for purposes of transportation conformity under CAA section 176(c),
based on the motor vehicle emissions in the 1997 PM-10 plan. On
November 20, 2002, we found that this submittal met the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
In this document, we refer to the PM-10 portion of the 1994 and
1997 Air Quality Management Plans as ``the 1994 plan'' and ``1997
plan.'' We refer to the 1998 and 1999 amendments to the 1997 plan as
the ``1998 amendments,'' and ``1999 amendments,'' respectively, and we
refer to the 2002 submittal as the ``2002 status report.''
Both the District and CARB satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior
to adoption of the plans and the motor vehicle emissions budgets. The
District conducted numerous public workshops, and properly noticed the
public hearing at which the plans were adopted. The SIP submittals
include proof of publication for notices of the public hearings.
Therefore, we conclude that the 1994 and 1997 plans, the 1998 and 1999
amendments, and the 2002 status report met the public notice and
involvement requirements of section 110(a)(1) of the CAA.
II. Evaluation of the SIP Submittals
A. Emission Inventories
The emission inventories in the 1997 plan supersede those in the
1994 plan. The 1997 plan includes summary emission inventories for
major source categories in tons per annual average day for VOC,
NOX, CO, SOx, and PM-10 for the 1993 base year (Table 3-3A)
and for 2000 (Table 3-5A) and 2006 (Table 3-6A). Appendix III (Base and
Future Year Emission Inventories) to the 1997 plan provides more
detailed emissions inventories for 1987, 1990, 1993, 1997, 2000, 2002,
2003, 2005, and 2006. Appendix III also includes additional emissions
data, including planning inventories for summer and winter days, and
estimates of emission reductions from each of the 1997 plan control
measures for 2000, 2006, and subsequent years. Finally, Appendix III
documents the source of the data and references SCAQMD and ARB reports
that provide detailed information on the methodologies used to estimate
emissions from area sources.
Appendix V (Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations) includes
estimated emission reductions by control measure for PM-10 milestone
years (1997, 2000, 2003, and 2006) and the detailed emission
inventories used in the modeling analyses.
The 1997 plan's emission inventories employ activity levels,
emission factors, and growth projections that were the most current and
accurate available when the plan was required to be submitted and when
the plan was, in fact, submitted: February 1997. The emission
inventories are complete with respect to sources that have been found
to contribute to PM-10 violations. We therefore propose to approve the
emission inventories in Chapter 3, Appendix III, and Appendix V of the
1997 plan as meeting the provisions of CAA section 172(c)(3).
In the years since development, adoption, and submittal of the 1997
plan, CARB has prepared draft revisions to the mobile source component
of the emissions inventories, including the model used to calculate
exhaust and evaporative emissions from motor vehicles. This California-
specific motor vehicle emissions model is known as EMFAC. The version
of the model available for development of the 1997 PM-10 plan is known
as EMFAC 7G, adopted by CARB in 1996 (CARB, Methodology for Estimating
Emissions from On-Road Motor Vehicles, 1996).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ EPA has approved EMFAC 7G for use in transportation plan and
program conformity analyses (letter from David Howekamp, EPA, to
Michael P. Kenny, CARB, dated April 16, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB and SCAQMD have formally committed to adopt and submit a
revised PM-10 plan and revised motor vehicle emissions budgets by
Spring 2003, and to base the new plan and budgets on use of the most
current and accurate emissions data, including the latest available
version of the EMFAC model for motor vehicle emissions, incorporating
the latest planning assumptions on vehicle fleet and age distribution,
and incorporating the latest activity levels. This revised plan will
also update the ozone and CO SIPs and
[[Page 77215]]
budgets for the South Coast, which are similarly based on motor vehicle
emissions calculated using EMFAC 7G and planning assumptions available
in 1996.
We believe that approval of the 1997 plan's emissions inventories
and the motor vehicle emissions budgets derived from the 1997 plan's
emissions inventories is warranted at this time, since the inventories
and budgets reflect the best available information at the time of the
plan's preparation. Moreover, both SCAQMD and CARB have committed to
submit, within a short period of time, a revised plan with updated
emissions inventories and budgets. The transportation conformity
implications of our proposed approval are discussed later in this
document, in section II.G., Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets.
B. Control Measures
1. Applicable Requirements
Because the South Coast is classified as serious for PM-10, the
nonattainment plan for the area must include control measures that
reflect a BACM level of control for each source category that
contributes significantly to a violation of the 24-hour or annual PM-10
NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The plan must also satisfy lesser control measure provisions
applicable to moderate areas, Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) for areas sources such as fugitive dust, and Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) for stationary sources such as
commercial and industrial operations. We are not making an
independent assessment of the plan's control measures against the
RACM and RACT requirements, since the plan will meet RACM and RACT
requirements if it is found to meet the BACM requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By analogy to Title I Part C of the Clean Air Act relating to
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), EPA interprets BACM for
serious PM-10 areas as generally similar to the definition of Best
Available Control Technology (BACT) for the PSD program. PM-10 BACM is
therefore defined as ``the maximum degree of emissions reduction of PM-
10 and PM-10 precursors from a source * * * which is determined on a
case-by-case basis, taking into account energy, environmental, and
economic impacts and other costs, to be achievable for such source
through application of production processes and available methods,
systems, and techniques for control of each such pollutant.'' General
Preamble Addendum, 59 FR 42010 (August 16, 1994).
EPA exempts from the BACM requirement de minimis source categories,
which do not contribute significantly to nonattainment. By analogy to
the new source permit programs (40 CFR 51.165(b)), EPA has presumed
that a source category contributes significantly to a violation of the
24-hour PM-10 NAAQS if its impact at the location of expected violation
would exceed 5 [mu]g/m3, and would contribute significantly to a
violation of the annual PM-10 NAAQS if its impact at the time and
location of the expected violation would exceed 1 [mu]g/m3. 59 FR
42011. However, states must also review the potential to attain the PM-
10 NAAQS earlier through application of controls on anthropogenic
sources below these general levels.
SCAQMD identified significant categories as part of the BACM
provisions of the 1994 plan. Appendix I-D (Best Available Control
Measures--PM10 SIP for the South Coast Air Basin), Chapter 3, includes
a calculation of the ambient impact of source categories at 5
representative sampling sites in the South Coast, which were subject to
source apportionment analysis. Table 3-2 shows source contribution to
annual average concentrations of ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate,
secondary carbon, and geological particulate. Table 3-3 shows
contributions to 24-hour average concentrations for the same species.
The Tables show that the following categories were clearly significant
contributors with respect to both of the NAAQS: Paved road dust,
unpaved road dust, construction and demolition, and motor vehicles. The
SCAQMD noted that 3 other categories are slightly above the de minimis
levels but, given emission uncertainties, may not be significant: Non-
farm equipment, non-utility internal combustion engines, and refinery
boilers and heaters. These 3 source categories and most of the source
categories that are below the de minimis levels were subject to
stringent SCAQMD or CARB regulations, which helped keep PM-10 impact
levels from these categories low, despite the large population and
activity levels in the basin.
CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) provides that BACM must be implemented
within 4 years after the date the area is reclassified to serious. In
the case of the South Coast, reclassification to serious became
effective on January 8, 1993, so BACM implementation is required by
January 8, 1997.
Because the State has requested an extension of the PM-10 NAAQS
attainment deadline pursuant to CAA section 188(e), the plan must
include a demonstration 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.''
Finally, the control measures in the serious area plan must be
sufficient to achieve expeditious attainment by the applicable
deadline.
2. Description of Control Measures
The control measures in the 1997 PM-10 plan are described at length
in Appendix IV-A (Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures). To
reduce secondary precursor emissions of PM-10 (notably NOX
and, to a lesser extent, SOx, VOC, and ammonia), the 1997
PM-10 plan relies on a large number of SCAQMD and CARB control
measures, either as part of the base line emissions (this is primarily
the case for measures which were fully adopted in regulatory form by
1996) or as specific control measure commitments. The majority of these
control measures have been approved in prior actions on South Coast
ozone plans or on individual SCAQMD regulations submitted over the
years.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See, for example, our approval of the 1997 ozone plan and
that plan's NOX and VOC control measure commitments, as
amended in 1999 (65 FR 6091, February 8, 2000; 65 FR 18903, April
10, 2000). We have approved the District's NOX and VOC
regulations in separate rulemaking over the years. You may see
copies of the approved rules at: http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/sips/.
See also our approval of SCAQMD's fugitive dust regulations,
Rules 403 (Fugitive Dust) and 1186 (PM-10 Emissions from Paved and
Unpaved Roads and Livestock Operations), on August 11, 1998 (63 FR
42786) and February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8057).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1997 plan also contains SCAQMD control measure commitments to
reduce primary PM-10. These control measure commitments have not been
previously approved and we are proposing approval of them at this time.
Table 1 below, entitled ``South Coast PM-10 Control Measure
Commitments,'' lists for each primary PM-10 control measure the SCAQMD
commitments to adopt and implement the measure by specific dates to
achieve particular emission reductions. A thorough discussion of each
of the measures may be found in Appendix IV-A; the adoption and
implementation dates are taken from Table 7-3 in the 1997 plan, Table
2-1 in the 1999 amendments, and Attachment D in the 2002 status report;
the emission reduction commitments are taken from the 1997 plan,
Appendix V, Attachment A, and from the 2002 status report, Attachment
D.
[[Page 77216]]
Table 1.--South Coast PM-10 Control Measure Commitments
[Emission reductions shown in tons per day of PM-10]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation 2003 emission 2006 emission
Measure Adoption date date reductions reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCM-01 Emission Reductions from Paved Roads 1997 1997 53.33 54.40
(Rule 403).................................
BCM-06 Emission Reductions from Fugitive 1997 1997 5.65 5.88
Dust Sources to meet BACM Requirements
(Rule 403).................................
BCM-03 Emission Reductions from Unpaved 1997 1997-2006 10.49 15.21
Roads & Parking Lot and Staging Areas (Rule
403).......................................
BCM-04 Emission Reductions from Agricultural 1997 1997-9 0.03 0.03
Activities (Rule 403)......................
CMB-09 Emission Reductions from Petroleum \1\ 2002 \1\ 2006 0.00 0.48
Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units.............
PRC-01 Emission Reductions from Woodworking \1\ 2002 \1\ 2002 7.20 7.50
Operations.................................
PRC-03 Emission Reductions from Restaurant \1\ 2003-4 \1\ 2004-6 0.00 7.87
Operations.................................
WST-01 Emission Reductions from Livestock \2\ 2002 \2\ 2004 6.16 5.96
Waste......................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These dates reflect changes made in the 2002 status report, amending the 1997 plan.
\2\ These dates reflect changes made in the 1999 amendments to the 1997 plan.
In the 1994 and 1997 plans and in the appendices to the plans
(e.g., 1994 plan, Appendix I-D), the District has provided extensive
documentation on both the control measures included in the plan and
those rejected. The documentation quantifies the costs of
implementation, discusses the technological feasibility of control
options, explains the schedule for expeditious implementation, and
examines other factors as part of a comprehensive justification of the
measures as reflecting BACM. As discussed above, the plans also include
quantitative analyses of the South Coast emissions sources and a
determination of which categories have ``significant'' impacts on PM-10
concentrations.
SCAQMD also reviewed the measures against the MSM criteria, in
order to demonstrate that the plan reflects the most stringent measures
that were included in the implementation plan of any State or were
achieved in practice in any State, and can feasibly be implemented in
the area. SCAQMD further analyzed all source categories and control
approaches as part of an ``all feasible measures'' requirement of State
law, and assessed on an international scale those potential control
measures that could be adopted to attain the ozone NAAQS in the South
Coast, the only ozone area in the country classified as extreme.
We agree with the SCAQMD's conclusion that the District's control
measures represent the most stringent measures at the time the plans
were required to be submitted. The plans therefore demonstrate that
BACM and MSM have been adopted for each of the significant source
categories.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The SCAQMD's analyses were performed in the months
immediately prior to adoption and submittal of the 1994 and 1997
plans, and so reflect information current at that time on the
availability and applicability of control measures within the South
Coast to address the BACM and MSM criteria. As part of the 2003 plan
revision, SCAQMD intends to reassess BACM and MSM and adopt any
measures directed by a new BACM or MSM evaluation. However, for
purposes of our action on the submittals now before us, we are
applying BACM and MSM tests appropriate at the time of the plans'
submittal dates, when the BACM and serious area attainment plans
were due. Because the statutory BACM implementation deadline will
have passed for any new measures included in the 2003 plan revision,
that plan must assure that BACM will be implemented ``as soon as
possible.'' Delaney v. EPA, 898 F.2d 687, 691 (9th Cir. 1990). EPA
has interpreted this requirement to be ``as soon as practicable.''
55 FR 36458, 36505 (September 9, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Proposed Action on Control Measures
We conclude that the submittals demonstrate that the control
measures for each significant source category, and for de minimis
categories as a whole, are consistent with the BACM requirement in
terms of the timing, degree, and extent of the control program and
reflect MSM at the time the plan was required to be submitted.
We also conclude that the measures are sufficient to meet RFP and
expeditious attainment provisions, as discussed below in sections II.D
and II.F.
We therefore propose to approve the control measures under CAA
section 110(k)(3), as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 110(a),
188(e), and 189(b)(1)(B). We are proposing to approve each of the
control measure commitments to adopt and implement rules by specified
dates and to achieve particular emission reductions by milestone years.
Specifically, we are approving the SCAQMD's enforceable commitments in
Table 1, taken from Attachment D to the 2002 status report, and the
descriptions of the measures in Appendix IV-A of the 1997 plan, as
amended by the 1999 amendments.
C. Contingency Measures
The CAA requires that the SIP include contingency measures to be
implemented if the area fails to meet progress requirements or to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable deadline. In response to this
provision, the 1997 plan includes contingency measures, 3 of which are
specifically directed toward increasing reductions of primary PM-10:
CTY-12--Emission Reductions from Paved Roads (Curb and Gutter/Chemical
Stabilization); CTY-13--Further Emission Reductions from Construction
and Demolition Activities; and CTY-14--Emission Reductions from
Miscellaneous Sources (Weed Abatement). These measures are discussed at
length in Appendix IV, Section 6, pages IV-6-25 through IV-6-33. Each
measure has the potential to achieve significant further PM-10
reductions and may be implemented quickly to cure a SIP shortfall.
We conclude that the 1997 plan satisfies the contingency
requirements, and propose to approve the SCAQMD's contingency measure
commitments under CAA section 110(k)(3) as meeting the contingency
provisions of CAA section 172(c)(9). Specifically, we are approving the
contingency measure commitments as set forth in Section 6 of Appendix
IV-A to the 1997 plan.
D. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestones
The plan must also include quantitative milestones which are to be
achieved every 3 years until the area is redesignated to attainment,
and show RFP toward attainment by the applicable attainment deadline.
CAA section 189(c).
The 1997 plan, as modified by the 2002 status report, includes
enforceable schedules for implementation of the specified control
measures resulting in
[[Page 77217]]
the emissions levels shown in Table 2--``South Coast PM-10 Reasonable
Further Progress Milestones.'' Using the approaches discussed in
Section II.F. below, the SCAQMD modeled the emissions levels for 2006
to demonstrate attainment of both the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS.
Table 2.--South Coast PM-10 Reasonable Further Progress Milestones
[Emissions are shown in tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2003 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM-10................................................. 310 301
NOX................................................... 748 635
SOX................................................... 64 67
VOC................................................... 747 623
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA proposes to approve this annual schedule as meeting the RFP and
milestone requirements of CAA section 189(c), since the schedule
reflects expeditious implementation of BACM and expeditious attainment
of the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS. We are approving the RFP and
milestone provisions in the 1997 plan, Chapters 4 and 6, Appendix III,
and Chapter 2 of Appendix V, as modified by the 2002 status report.
E. Attainment Demonstration
The SIP must provide a detailed demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the specified control strategy will reduce PM-10
emissions so that the standards will be attained as soon as practicable
but no later than December 31, 2006, assuming final EPA approval of the
attainment date extension. CAA section 189(b)(1)(A). EPA considers the
area to be in attainment of the NAAQS if 24-hour concentrations are 150
ug/m3 or less and the annual arithmetic mean is 50 ug/m3 or less. In
the case of the South Coast, the attainment demonstration in the 1997
PM-10 plan must analyze both the 24-hour and annual NAAQS, since the
area has historically violated both NAAQS.
Because of the complexity and diversity of the PM-10 problem in the
South Coast, the SCAQMD decided to use a variety of modeling approaches
to assess control scenarios and determine attainment of the 24-hour and
annual PM-10 NAAQS: (1) Urban Airshed Modeling with Linear Chemistry
Module (UAM/LC (Lurmann and Kumar 1996); (2) the Chemical Mass Balance
(CMB) receptor model for source apportionment in the Basin; (3) the
particle in cell (PIC) model developed by California Institute of
Technology for determining sulfate and nitrate formation; and (4) UAM-
Aero (Kumar and Lurmann, 1996) for evaluating interactions of
emissions, meteorology, and aerosol chemistry. The inputs and
applications of each of these models are described in Chapter 2 of
Appendix V (Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations) of the 1997 plan.
The modeling results for 2000, 2006, and 2010 are presented in the
1997 AQMP, Chapter 5 (Figures 5-3, 5-4, and 5-5), and on pages V-2-58
to V-2-67 of Appendix V. The UAM/LC and CMB modeling predicts that the
peak annual concentration in 2006 with implementation of controls will
be 48.10 ug/m3, compared to the 50 ug/m3 annual PM-10 NAAQS. The
speciated rollback analysis predicts peak concentrations of 47.10 ug/m3
for 2006 with controls. The UAM/LC and CMB modeling predicts that the
peak 24-hour concentration in 2006 with controls will be 142.9 ug/m3,
while the speciated rollback analysis predicts 136.26 ug/m3, compared
to the 150 ug/m3 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.
In contrast to other pollutants, we have not issued detailed
modeling guidelines for PM-10, nor have we established minimum
performance requirements for PM-10 modeling.\9\ We have reviewed the
SCAQMD's modeling approaches for both primary PM-10 and secondary PM-
10, using both receptor modeling and dispersion modeling. We believe
that the modeling in the 1997 plan provides a reasonable basis for
linking emissions with air quality, for identifying an appropriate
control strategy, and for determining whether the strategy delivers
attainment for both the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Over the years, EPA has issued some recommendations on PM-10
modeling, including those codified at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W,
7.2.1 and 7.2.2, and those set forth in the PM-10 SIP Development
Guideline (USEPA 450/2-860001, 6/87). Although we do not set minimum
performance goals or require model performance evaluation for PM-10
modeling, the SCAQMD included a performance evaluation for the UAM/
LC at each of the 5 study sites for sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, and
primary PM-10 (1997 plan, Appendix V, pages V-2-52 to V-2-54). For
the peak site, Rubidoux, the annual percent error is under 20
percent for nitrate, ammonium, and primary PM-10, but is 42.9
percent for sulfate. Sulfates, however, account for less than 5 ug/
m3 at each of the stations, and bias in the prediction performance
is thus typically less than 2 ug/m3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SCAQMD's modeling shows that the level of emissions after
implementation of the proposed set of control strategies would result
in ambient concentrations within the South Coast in 2006 consistent
with attainment of both the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS. We
therefore conclude that the air quality modeling and attainment
demonstration contained in the 1997 plan, Chapter 5 and Appendix V,
Chapter 2, are consistent with existing EPA guidance, and we propose to
approve the attainment demonstration under CAA section 189(b)(1)(A).
F. Extension of the Attainment Deadline
CAA section 188(e) allows states to apply for up to a 5-year
extension of the serious area attainment deadline of December 31, 2001.
In order to obtain the extension, there must be a showing that: (1) The
plan for the area includes the most stringent measures that are
included in the SIP of any state or are achieved in practice in any
state, and can feasibly be implemented in the area, (2) the state
complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area
in the implementation plan for the area, and (3) attainment by 2001
would be impracticable.
As discussed in section II.B. above, we propose to conclude that
the South Coast PM-10 plans include BACM and MSM for each significant
source category, and that the implementation schedule for each control
measure is as expeditious as practicable. Attachment B to the 2002
status report shows that the responsible agencies have generally met
the SIP requirements and commitments. Although the adoption and
implementation dates of some of the 1997 plan's scheduled measures have
been revised, EPA agrees with the SCAQMD that SIP implementation has
been satisfactory and changes in the schedule should not adversely
affect air quality at the 2003 milestone or at the 2006 attainment
date.
Using UAM/LC and chemical mass balance modeling techniques
discussed below in section II.E., the SCAQMD calculated 24-hour and
annual PM10 concentrations in the year 2000 for the 5 representative
sampling sites in the basin, with and without the plan control measures
(1997 plan, Tables 2-17 and 2-19). The results show attainment at 4 of
the sites but not at the Rubidoux site in northwestern Riverside
County, where continued violations of both the 24-hour and annual NAAQS
were predicted, despite aggressive implementation of BACM and MSM.
Similar modeling analyses for 2006 show that additional emissions
reductions from BACM and MSM, along with further emissions reductions
from de minimis source categories, reduced ambient PM-10 concentrations
further, bringing Rubidoux values slightly below both the 24-hour and
annual PM-10 NAAQS. Based on this analysis, the SCAQMD determined that
attainment
[[Page 77218]]
could not feasibly be achieved before 2006.
We find that the SCAQMD has met the CAA provisions relating to
attainment date extensions, and we propose to grant, under CAA section
188(e), a 5-year attainment date extension to December 31, 2006, for
attainment of both the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS, based on the
demonstration provided in the 1997 plan in Chapters 5 and 6 and in
Appendix V, Chapter 2.
G. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Rate of progress and attainment demonstration submittals must
specify the maximum emissions of transportation-related precursors of
PM-10 allowed in each milestone year and the attainment year. The
submittals must also demonstrate that these emissions levels, when
considered with emissions from all other sources, are consistent with
RFP and attainment. In order for us to find these emissions levels or
``budgets'' adequate and approvable, the submittal must meet the
conformity adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and be approvable
under all pertinent SIP requirements.
The budgets defined by this and other plans when they are approved
into the SIP or, in some cases, when the budgets are found to be
adequate, are then used to determine the conformity of transportation
plans, programs, and projects to the SIP, as described by CAA section
176(c)(3)(A). For more detail on this part of the conformity
requirements, see 40 CFR 93.118. For transportation conformity
purposes, the cap on emissions of transportation-related PM-10
precursors is known as the motor vehicle emissions budget. The budget
must reflect all of the motor vehicle control measures contained in the
attainment demonstration (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v)), and must include PM-
10 and PM-10 precursor emissions from the following sources: motor
vehicles, reentrained dust from traffic on paved and unpaved roads, and
emissions during construction of highway and rail projects.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The conformity regulations provide that, for purposes of
budgets and conformity determinations, the applicable pollutants are
VOC, NOX, and PM-10 if the applicable implementation plan
establishes a budget for such emissions as part of the RFP,
attainment, or maintenance strategy, or EPA has made such a finding.
40 CFR 91.102(b)(2)(iii). Thus, although the SCAQMD has established
SOX as a PM-10 precursor in the South Coast and has set
RFP and attainment reduction targets for SOX, the
conformity regulations do not allow for SOX budgets. The
conformity regulations require that, in PM-10 areas with SIPs which
identify construction-related fugitive PM-10 as a contributor to the
nonattainment problem, the PM-10 budget and conformity analysis must
include fugitive PM-10 emissions associated with the construction of
highway and transit projects. 40 CFR 93.122(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The motor vehicle emissions budgets are presented in Table 3 below,
entitled ``South Coast PM-10 Plan Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets,''
which is taken from Attachment C to the 2002 status report. Emission
reductions attributed to transportation control measures (TCMs) in the
SIP are shown as positive numbers, and emission increases associated
with the TCMs are shown as negative numbers in Table 3; however, as
noted, the TCM emissions impacts are incorporated in the motor vehicle
emissions lines in the budgets.
Table 3.--South Coast PM-10 Plan Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
[Emissions are shown in tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year and Source Category PM-10 NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 Budget:
Motor vehicles..................... 14.5 429.1 258.0
Reentrained dust from paved roads.. 130.6 ......... .........
Reentrained dust from unpaved roads 41.9 ......... .........
Construction of transportation 27.1 ......... .........
projects..........................
------------
Total.......................... 214.1 419.1 258.0
TCM reductions (already 0.1 -1.8 9.6
included in budget)...........
2006 Budget:
Motor vehicles..................... 13.7 350.2 187.2
Reentrained dust from paved roads.. 133.2 ......... .........
Reentrained dust from unpaved roads 37.2 ......... .........
Construction of transportation 28.1 ......... .........
projects..........................
------------
Total.......................... 212.2 350.2 187.2
TCM reductions (already 0.1 -2.3 14.7
included in budget)...........
2010 Budget:
Motor vehicles..................... 13.5 282.7 81.8
Reentrained dust from paved roads.. 136.7 ......... .........
Reentrained dust from unpaved roads 37.2 ......... .........
Construction of transportation 29.1 ......... .........
projects..........................
------------
Total.......................... 216.5 282.7 81.8
TCM reductions (already 0.2 -3.2 17.0
included in budget)...........
2020 Budget:
Motor vehicles..................... 14.6 272.3 56.3
Reentrained dust from paved roads.. 143.7 ......... .........
Reentrained dust from unpaved roads 37.2 ......... .........
Construction of transportion 30.0 ......... .........
projects..........................
------------
Total.......................... 225.5 272.3 56.3
TCM Reductions................. 0.5 7.2 11.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above in section II.A., Emission Inventories, the
motor vehicle emissions portion of these budgets (i.e., the evaporative
and tailpipe emissions) was developed using the EMFAC 7G motor vehicle
emissions factors.
[[Page 77219]]
When the 2010 and 2020 budgets were adopted on April 10, 1998,
SCAQMD submitted with the 1998 amendments a modeled demonstration that
the emissions levels for motor vehicles reflected in the budgets,
combined with emissions levels from all other PM-10 and PM-10 precursor
emissions sources in the South Coast, would be consistent with
maintenance of the 24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS. This demonstration
was required in order to allow for approval of the budgets, since the
budgets show a slight increase in emissions of primary PM-10 over the
2006 attainment levels (an increase of 2 percent in 2010 and 6 percent
in 2020). The demonstration showed that the increase in primary PM-10
associated with motor vehicles is more than offset by decreases in
emissions of secondary PM-10 precursors, resulting in projected 24-hour
and annual concentrations below the predicted 2006 levels, which are
below the NAAQS.
We propose to approve the motor vehicle emission budgets as
consistent with the adequacy criteria of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), including
consistency with the baseline emissions inventories, the motor vehicle
control measure emission reductions used in the progress and attainment
demonstration, and the reductions needed for continued attainment of
the standard after the attainment deadline. Specifically, we are
approving the budgets in the 2002 status report, which are based on,
and consistent with, the 1997 plan and the 1998 amendment.
As discussed in section II.A., CARB is finalizing a revised version
of EMFAC, and both CARB and SCAQMD have committed to adopt and submit a
comprehensive revision to the PM-10 plan in Spring 2003, using the new
EMFAC, incorporating the latest planning assumptions on vehicle fleet
and age distribution, and incorporating the latest activity levels.
This revised plan will include revised budgets, based on the new
inventory and attainment demonstration. Assuming that these new budgets
are adequate and approvable, the new budgets will soon replace the
budgets in the current submittal.
Since these revised budgets will be based on the most current and
accurate motor vehicle emissions data, we intend to allow for expedited
use of the updated budgets in transportation conformity determinations.
Therefore, we propose to limit our proposed approval of the budgets in
the current submittal to last only until we find adequate the new
budgets that are expected to be adopted in Spring 2003 as part of the
revised PM-10 plan for the South Coast. On the effective date of our
adequacy finding for the new budgets, our approval of the budgets in
the current submittal would terminate and thus the new adequate budget
would apply for purposes of transportation conformity. We have
separately promulgated a similar limitation on the approval of the
existing South Coast ozone and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
budgets, in order to expedite use of new budgets associated with these
pollutants in the 2003 plan revision for the South Coast. 67 FR 69139
(November 15, 2002).
III. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action
We are proposing to approve the serious area PM-10 SIP submitted by
the State of California for the South Coast. Specifically, we are
proposing to approve the 1994 and 1997 PM-10 plans, the 1998 and 1999
amendments, and the 2002 status report with respect to the CAA
requirements for emissions inventories under section 172(c)(3); control
measures under section 110(k)(3), as meeting the requirements of
sections 110(a), 188(e), and 189(b)(1)(B); RFP under section 189(c);
contingency measures under section 172(c)(9); demonstration of
attainment under section 189(b)(1)(A); and motor vehicle emissions
budgets under section 176(c)(2)(A). We are proposing to limit our
approval of the motor vehicle emissions budgets to last only until the
effective date of our adequacy findings for new replacement budgets. We
are also proposing to approve the State's request for an extension of
the attainment date from December 31, 2001 to December 31, 2006, under
CAA section 188(e). We show the proposed approvals in Table 4--
``Proposed Approvals of South Coast PM-10 Submittals.''
Table 4.--Proposed Approvals of South Coast PM-10 Submittals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section Provision SIP submittal Plan citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
172(c)(3)........................ Emission inventories..... 1997 plan............... 1997 plan Ch. 3; App.
III; App. V, Ch. 2
110(a), 188(e), and 189(b)(1)(B). Control measures......... 1994 plan............... 1997 plan Ch. 4, App. IV-
1997 plan............... A; 1999 plan, App. B;
1999 amendment.......... 2002 status report,
2002 status report...... Att. D
189(c)........................... Reasonable further 1997 plan............... 1997 plan, Ch. 4 & 6,
progress. 2002 status report...... App. III, App. V, Ch.
2; 2002 status report
172(c)(9)........................ Contingency measures..... 1997 plan............... 1997 plan, App. IV-A
189(b)(1)(A)..................... Attainment demonstration. 1997 plan............... 1997 plan, Ch. 5, App. V
176(c)(2)(A)..................... Motor vehicle emissions 1997 plan............... 2002 status report, Att.
budgets. 1998 amendment.......... C
2002 status report......
188(e)........................... Attainment date extension 1997 plan............... 1997 plan, Ch. 5 & 6,
App. V, Ch. 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this proposed action is also not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed action merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to
approve pre-existing
[[Page 77220]]
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a
state plan implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: December 6, 2002.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 02-31680 Filed 12-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P