[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26749-26750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11295]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9150-8]
Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets In Submitted
San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 Reasonable Further Progress and Attainment
Plan for Transportation Conformity Purposes; CA
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of adequacy and inadequacy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that the Agency
has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the years 2009
and 2012 from the San Joaquin Valley 2008 PM2.5 Plan are
adequate for transportation conformity purposes. In this notice, EPA is
also notifying the public that the Agency has found that the motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the year 2014 from the San Joaquin Valley
2008 PM2.5 Plan are inadequate for transportation conformity
purposes. The San Joaquin Valley 2008 PM2.5 Plan was
submitted to EPA on June 30, 2008 by the California Air Resources Board
as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan and includes
reasonable further progress and attainment demonstrations for the 1997
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality
standards. As a result of our adequacy findings, the San Joaquin Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organizations and the U.S. Department of
Transportation must use the adequate budgets, and cannot use the
inadequate budgets, for future conformity determinations.
DATES: This finding is effective May 27, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Wicher, U.S. EPA, Region IX,
Air Division AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901;
(415) 972-3957 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have
already made. EPA Region IX sent a letter to California Air Resources
Board (CARB or the State) on April 23, 2010 stating that the motor
vehicle emissions budgets in the submitted San Joaquin Valley 2008
PM2.5 Plan for the reasonable further progress (RFP)
milestone years of 2009 and 2012 are adequate. The finding is available
at EPA's conformity Web site: http://
[[Page 26750]]
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. The adequate
motor vehicle emissions budgets are provided in the following table:
SJV PM2.5 Plan Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Found Adequate
[Annual average, tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 2012
---------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX PM2.5 NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno.......................................... 2.2 56.5 1.9 44.2
Kern (SJV)...................................... 3.4 87.7 3.0 74.2
Kings........................................... 0.7 17.9 0.6 14.6
Madera.......................................... 0.6 14.1 0.5 11.4
Merced.......................................... 1.5 33.6 1.2 26.7
San Joaquin..................................... 1.6 39.1 1.4 32.8
Stanislaus...................................... 1.0 25.8 0.9 20.8
Tulare.......................................... 0.9 23.3 0.8 19.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our letter dated April 23, 2010 also states that budgets for the
attainment year of 2014 are inadequate for transportation conformity
purpose. The State has included additional on-road mobile source
emissions reductions in the budgets for 2014 from the 2007 State
Strategy for the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The
adequate budgets include no such reductions but rather reflect
emissions reductions from CARB rules that have already been adopted.
EPA has determined that the 2014 budgets are inadequate because they
include new emission reductions that do not result from specific or
enforceable control measures. As a result, three of the transportation
conformity rule's adequacy criteria are not met (40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv), and (v)) for these budgets. The inadequate
motor vehicle emissions budgets are provided in the following table:
SJV PM2.5 Plan Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Found Inadequate
[Annual average, tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014
---------------------
PM2.5 NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno............................................ 1.1 26.0
Kern (SJV)........................................ 1.4 41.6
Kings............................................. 0.3 8.1
Madera............................................ 0.3 6.7
Merced............................................ 0.6 14.8
San Joaquin....................................... 0.9 20.3
Stanislaus........................................ 0.5 12.4
Tulare............................................ 0.5 12.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Receipt of the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the San Joaquin
Valley 2008 PM2.5 Plan was announced on EPA's transportation
conformity Web site on August 19, 2008. We received no comments in
response to the adequacy review posting. The finding is available at
EPA's transportation conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.
Transportation conformity is required by Clean Air Act section
176(c). EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans,
transportation improvement programs, and projects conform to SIPs and
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not
they do conform. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation
activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing
violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air
quality standards.
The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle
emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) which was promulgated in our August 15, 1997 final
rule (62 FR 43780, 43781-43783). We have further described our process
for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1,
2004 final rule (69 FR 40004, 40038), and we used the information in
these resources in making our adequacy determination. Please note that
an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and
should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval action for the
SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be
disapproved.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 5, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-11295 Filed 5-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P