83 FR 62720 - Findings of Failure To Submit Complete State Implementation Plans Required for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 234 (December 6, 2018)

Page Range		62720-62724
FR Document		2018-26359
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to find that California has failed to submit complete state implementation plans (SIPs) required under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') to implement the 1997, 2006, and 2012 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') for fine particulate matter (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) in the San Joaquin Valley. For the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, California was required to submit by December 31, 2016, a SIP submission that provides for, among other things, annual reductions in emissions of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> or a PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursor pollutant within the area of not less than five percent of the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory for the area. For the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, California was required to submit by August 21, 2017, a SIP submission that meets the requirements for Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas, including the requirement for best available control measures (BACM). For the 2012 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, California was required to submit by October 15, 2016, a SIP submission that meets the requirements for Moderate PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas, including the requirement for reasonably available control measures (RACM). California submitted substantial portions of each of these required SIP submissions as part of an integrated plan on November 16, 2018, but each of these submissions fails to meet the EPA's minimum criteria for completeness. If the EPA has not affirmatively found that the State has submitted complete SIPs that correct the deficiencies in each of these SIP submissions within 18 months of this finding, the offset sanction will apply in the area. If within 6 additional months the EPA still has not affirmatively determined that the State has submitted complete SIPs that correct the deficiencies, the highway funding sanction will apply in the area. No later than 2 years after the EPA makes these findings, if the State has not submitted, and the EPA has not approved, each of the required SIP submissions, the EPA must promulgate a federal implementation plan (FIP) to address any remaining requirements.
Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 234 (Thursday, December 6, 2018)
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 234 (Thursday, December 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62720-62724]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26359]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0778; FRL-9987-38-Region 9]


Findings of Failure To Submit Complete State Implementation Plans 
Required for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS; California; San 
Joaquin Valley

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to find that California has failed to submit complete state 
implementation plans (SIPs) required under the Clean Air Act (CAA or 
``Act'') to implement the 1997, 2006, and 2012 national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') for fine particulate matter 
(PM2.5) in the San Joaquin Valley. For the 1997 annual and 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, California was required to submit by 
December 31, 2016, a SIP submission that provides for, among other 
things, annual reductions in emissions of direct PM2.5 or a 
PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant within the area of not less 
than five percent of the amount of such emissions as reported in the 
most recent inventory for the area. For the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, California was required to submit by August 21, 
2017, a SIP submission that meets the requirements for Serious 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including the requirement for 
best available control measures (BACM). For the 2012 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS, California was required to submit by October 
15, 2016, a SIP submission that meets the requirements for Moderate 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including the requirement for 
reasonably available control measures (RACM). California submitted 
substantial portions of each of these required SIP submissions as part 
of an integrated plan on November 16, 2018, but each of these 
submissions fails to meet the EPA's minimum criteria for completeness.
    If the EPA has not affirmatively found that the State has submitted 
complete SIPs that correct the deficiencies in each of these SIP 
submissions within 18 months of this finding, the offset sanction will 
apply in the area. If within 6 additional months the EPA still has not 
affirmatively determined that the State has submitted complete SIPs 
that

[[Page 62721]]

correct the deficiencies, the highway funding sanction will apply in 
the area. No later than 2 years after the EPA makes these findings, if 
the State has not submitted, and the EPA has not approved, each of the 
required SIP submissions, the EPA must promulgate a federal 
implementation plan (FIP) to address any remaining requirements.

DATES: This action will be effective on January 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0778. Generally, documents in the docket 
are listed and publicly available at http://www.regulations.gov. 
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be 
publicly available in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4192, [email protected].

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

Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)

    Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when 
an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are 
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the 
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for 
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for 
taking this final agency action without prior proposal and opportunity 
for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a 
finding of failure to submit complete SIPs, or elements of SIPs, 
required by the CAA, where a state has made incomplete submissions, to 
meet the requirement. Thus, notice and public procedures are 
unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Minimum Criteria for Completeness of a SIP Submission
    C. California's SIP Submissions
II. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit Complete SIPs
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. Statutory Requirements

1. 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
    The EPA first promulgated NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18, 
1997, setting the primary and secondary annual standards at 15 
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) and the primary and secondary 
24-hour standards at 65 [mu]g/m\3\.\1\ Effective April 5, 2005, the EPA 
designated the San Joaquin Valley as nonattainment for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS.\2\ Following a January 4, 2013 decision of the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (``D.C. Circuit'') remanding 
the EPA's 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS,\3\ the EPA published a final rule on June 2, 
2014, classifying the San Joaquin Valley, among other areas, as a 
``Moderate'' nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 
under subpart 4, part D of title I of the Act.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997) (codified at 40 CFR 50.7).
    \2\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
    \3\ Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d. 428 (DC 
Cir. 2013) (``NRDC''). 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 nonattainment areas for 
particles less than or equal to 10 [mu]m in diameter 
(PM10) in subpart 4, part D of title I of the CAA. The 
court reasoned that the plain meaning of the CAA requires 
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 standards under subpart 
4 because PM2.5 falls within the statutory definition of 
PM10 and is thus subject to the same statutory 
requirements as PM10. The court remanded the rule, 
without vacatur, and instructed the EPA ``to repromulgate these 
rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.''
    \4\ 79 FR 31566.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective May 7, 2015, the EPA reclassified the San Joaquin Valley 
as a ``Serious'' nonattainment area for the 1997 PM 2.5 
NAAQS.\5\ Upon reclassification as a Serious Area, the San Joaquin 
Valley became subject to a December 31, 2015 deadline under CAA section 
188(c)(2) for attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. On February 9, 
2016, the EPA proposed to grant the State's request for extensions of 
the December 31, 2015 attainment date under CAA section 188(e), to 
December 31, 2018, for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and to 
December 31, 2020, for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 
San Joaquin Valley.\6\ On October 6, 2016, after considering public 
comments, the EPA denied California's request for these extensions of 
the attainment date.\7\ Consequently, on November 23, 2016, the EPA 
determined that the San Joaquin Valley had failed to attain the 1997 
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2015 
Serious Area attainment date.\8\ This determination triggered a 
requirement for California to submit, by December 31, 2016, a revised 
PM2.5 attainment plan that satisfies the requirements of CAA 
section 189(d).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015).
    \6\ 81 FR 6936. California's request for extension of the 
Serious Area attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley accompanied 
its Serious Area attainment plan for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 
and related motor vehicle emission budgets, submitted June 25, 2015 
and August 13, 2015, respectively.
    \7\ 81 FR 69396.
    \8\ 81 FR 84481.
    \9\ CAA section 189(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The section 189(d) plan must, among other things, demonstrate 
expeditious attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS within the 
time period provided under CAA section 179(d) and provide for annual 
reductions in emissions of direct PM2.5 or a 
PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant within the area of not less 
than five percent per year from the most recent emissions inventory for 
the area until attainment.\10\ The section 189(d) plan must also 
include, among other things:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id. and 40 CFR 51.1010(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions 
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    2. plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP) 
(CAA 172(c)(2));
    3. 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)); and
    4. 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)).
2. 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
    On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS by lowering it from 65 [micro]g/m\3\ to 35 [micro]g/m\3\.\11\ 
Effective December 14, 2009, the EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley 
as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA 
initially classified the San Joaquin Valley area as a Moderate Area 
effective July 2, 2014, and reclassified the area as

[[Page 62722]]

a Serious Area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS effective February 
19, 2016.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006) (codified at 40 CFR 50.13).
    \12\ 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014), 81 FR 2993 (January 20, 2016), 
and 81 FR 42263 (June 29, 2016) (correcting amendment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon the area's reclassification as a Serious Area for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS, California was required to submit additional 
SIP revisions by August 21, 2017, 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Serious Area plan must include, among other things:
    1. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions 
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    2. provisions for the implementation of BACM, including best 
available control technology (BACT), for sources of direct 
PM2.5 and all PM2.5 plan precursors no later than 
4 years after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
3. 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)); \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ A state seeking an extension of a Serious Area attainment 
date under section 188(e) must also meet additional requirements 
under that provision, including the requirement to demonstrate that 
the SIP for the area includes the most stringent measures that are 
included in any SIP or are achieved in practice in any state, and 
can feasibly be implemented in the area. CAA section 188(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. plan provisions that require RFP (CAA 172(c)(2));
    5. 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));
    6. 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));
    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 NSR program to lower the 
applicable ``major stationary source'' thresholds from 100 tpy to 70 
tpy (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
    3. 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
    On December 14, 2012, the EPA revised the primary annual 
PM2.5 standard by lowering it from 15.0 to 12.0 [micro]g/
m\3\.\15\ Effective April 15, 2015, the EPA designated and classified 
the San Joaquin Valley as a Moderate nonattainment area for the 2012 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS.\16\ This designation and classification 
triggered a requirement for California to submit a Moderate Area plan 
addressing attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 
San Joaquin Valley no later than 18 months after the designation, i.e., 
by October 15, 2016.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) (codified at 40 CFR 50.18).
    \16\ 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).
    \17\ CAA section 189(a)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Moderate Area plan must include, among other things:
    1. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions 
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in 
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    2. provisions for the implementation of RACM, including reasonably 
available control technology (RACT), for sources of direct 
PM2.5 and all PM2.5 plan precursors no later than 
4 years after designation (CAA section 189(a)(1)(C));
    3. a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan 
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than December 31, 2021, or a demonstration that attainment by that date 
is impracticable (CAA section 189(a)(1)(B));
    4. plan provisions that require RFP (CAA 172(c)(2));
    5. 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));
    6. 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));
    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. Any revisions to the nonattainment NSR program necessary to 
implement the requirements of CAA section 189(a)(1)(A) for the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS.

B. Minimum Criteria for Completeness of a SIP Submission

    Section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA requires that the EPA promulgate 
minimum criteria that any plan submission must meet before the EPA is 
required to act on such submission. The EPA has promulgated these 
criteria at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. We refer to these requirements 
as the ``completeness criteria.'' Section 2.1 of the completeness 
criteria requires that each plan submission include, among other 
things: (1) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State 
code or body of regulations, including the date of adoption or final 
issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from 
the adoption/issuance date, and (2) evidence that the State followed 
all of the procedural requirements of the State's laws and constitution 
in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. Section 
2.2 of the completeness criteria requires that each plan submission 
contain certain technical support, including (1) a demonstration that 
the SIP will protect RFP if approved, and (2) modeling to support the 
proposed revision. The completeness criteria also identify other 
administrative materials and technical support documentation that must 
be included in each plan submission.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See generally 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, sections 2.1 and 
2.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(k)(2) of the CAA requires the EPA to act on a SIP 
submission only after the State has submitted a SIP submission (or part 
thereof) that meets the completeness criteria, either by EPA 
determination or by operation of law under CAA section 110(k)(1)(B).

C. California's SIP Submissions

    On November 16, 2018, California submitted to the EPA a draft of 
the ``2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 
Standards'' (``2018 PM2.5 Plan''), a comprehensive plan for 
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley. 
This submission includes substantial portions of a section 189(d) plan 
addressing attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, a Serious 
Area plan addressing attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 
a Moderate Area plan addressing attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 
NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley. The

[[Page 62723]]

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District adopted the 2018 
PM2.5 Plan on November 15, 2018.
    As a threshold matter, however, the California Air Resources Board 
(CARB) noted in its letter transmitting the SIP submission to the EPA 
that CARB had not yet presented the 2018 PM2.5 Plan to its 
Board or adopted it for submission to the EPA as a revision to the 
California SIP. CARB stated that it was providing the submission to the 
EPA now so that EPA staff can begin its review while CARB completes the 
final step in plan development when it considers approval of the 2018 
PM2.5 Plan at its hearing scheduled for January 24-25, 
2019.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Letter dated November 16, 2018, from Kurt Karperos, Deputy 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA 
Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the EPA cannot at this time find that California has 
submitted the required complete PM2.5 SIP revisions for the 
San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. CARB's November 16, 2018 SIP 
submission does not include evidence that the State has adopted the 
plan in the State code or body of regulations or evidence that the 
State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State's laws 
and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of 
the plan, as required by 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, section 2.1. Based 
on these deficiencies alone, the SIP submission fails to meet the EPA's 
minimum completeness criteria. In addition, until we receive the formal 
SIP submission, we cannot determine whether the plan that CARB 
ultimately adopts will contain all of the necessary components of the 
required PM2.5 attainment plans for the San Joaquin Valley 
and the associated technical support required for each submission under 
40 CFR part 51, appendix V, section 2.2.
    We note, however, that CARB's submission represents a significant 
step in the State's and District's multi-year effort to address the 
Act's attainment planning requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS 
in the San Joaquin Valley, and we commit to continue working closely 
with both agencies as they implement and enforce the requirements of 
these plans going forward.

II. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit Complete SIPs

    Under section 110(k)(1)(C) of the Act, where the EPA determines 
that a SIP submission (or part thereof) does not meet the EPA's minimum 
completeness criteria established in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, the 
state shall be treated as not having made the submission (or part 
thereof). Sections 179(a) and 110(c) of the CAA establish specific 
consequences for failure to submit complete SIP submissions or SIP 
elements required under part D of title I of the Act, including the 
eventual imposition of mandatory sanctions in the affected area.
    In accordance with the EPA's sanctions sequencing rule in 40 CFR 
52.31, the offset sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) would 
apply in the San Joaquin Valley area 18 months after the effective date 
of these findings, if the EPA has not affirmatively determined by that 
date that the State has submitted a complete SIP addressing the 
deficiency that is the basis for these findings. If, within 6 months 
after the offset sanction applies, the EPA still has not affirmatively 
determined that the State has submitted a complete SIP addressing the 
deficiency that is the basis for the findings, the highway funding 
sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(1) would also apply in the 
San Joaquin Valley. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5), neither sanction would 
apply if the EPA determines within 18 months after the effective date 
of these findings that the State has submitted a complete SIP 
submission addressing the deficiency that is the basis for these 
findings.
    Additionally, a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP 
submission triggers an obligation under CAA section 110(c) for the EPA 
to promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years after the finding, unless the 
state has submitted, and the EPA has approved, the required SIP 
submittal. Thus, the EPA would be required to promulgate a 
PM2.5 FIP for the San Joaquin Valley, in relevant part, if 
California does not submit and the EPA does not approve all of the 
necessary SIP submissions within 2 years after the effective date of 
these findings.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is finding that California has failed to submit complete 
SIP revisions for implementation of the 1997, 2006, and 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley as required under 
subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the CAA and the PM2.5 
SIP Requirements Rule. The consequences of these findings are discussed 
above in section II of this notice.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning 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. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the PRA. This final rule does not establish any new 
information collection requirement apart from what is already required 
by law. This rule relates to the requirements in the CAA for states to 
submit SIPs under sections 172, 188 and 189 which address the statutory 
requirements that apply to areas designated as nonattainment for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this rule 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. The rule is 
a finding that California has not submitted the necessary SIP 
revisions.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

F. 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.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive

[[Page 62724]]

Order 13175. This rule finds that California has failed to submit SIP 
revisions that satisfy certain nonattainment area planning requirements 
under sections 172, 188 and 189 of the CAA for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. 
No tribe is subject to the requirement to submit an implementation plan 
under section 172 or under subpart 4 of part D of Title I of the CAA. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern 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 action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
because it is a finding that California has failed to submit certain 
SIP revisions that satisfy the nonattainment area planning requirements 
under sections 172, 188 and 189 of the CAA for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area 
and does not directly or disproportionately affect children.

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

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

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed 
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, 
or indigenous populations. In finding that California has failed to 
submit SIP revisions that satisfy certain nonattainment area planning 
requirements under sections 172, 188 and 189 of the CAA for the1997, 
2006, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley 
nonattainment area, this action does not directly affect the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

M. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 4, 2019. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Approval and promulgation of implementation 
plans, Administrative practice and procedures, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, and 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 19, 2018.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-26359 Filed 12-4-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
62720 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday, December 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations

methods, under Executive Order 12898 States prior to publication of the rule in Dated: November 26, 2018.
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). the Federal Register. A major rule Anne Idsal,
In addition, the SIP is not approved to cannot take effect until 60 days after it Regional Administrator, Region 6.
apply on any Indian reservation land or is published in the Federal Register. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
in any other area where EPA or an This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). PART 52—APPROVAL AND
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean PROMULGATION OF
Indian country, the rule does not have Air Act, petitions for judicial review of IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
tribal implications and will not impose this action must be filed in the United
substantial direct costs on tribal States Court of Appeals for the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
governments or preempt tribal law as appropriate circuit by February 4, 2019. continues to read as follows:
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Filing a petition for reconsideration by Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). the Administrator of this final rule does
The Congressional Review Act, 5 not affect the finality of this action for Subpart SS—Texas
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small the purposes of judicial review nor does
Business Regulatory Enforcement it extend the time within which a ■ 2. In § 52.2270(e) the second table
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides petition for judicial review may be filed, titled ‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory
that before a rule may take effect, the and shall not postpone the effectiveness Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory
agency promulgating the rule must of such rule or action. This action may Measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended
submit a rule report, which includes a not be challenged later in proceedings to by revising the entry for ‘‘Infrastructure
copy of the rule, to each House of the enforce its requirements. (See section and Interstate Transport for the 1997
Congress and to the Comptroller General 307(b)(2).) Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
of the United States. EPA will submit a NAAQS’’ to read as follows:
report containing this action and other List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
required information to the U.S. Senate, Environmental protection, Air § 52.2270 Identification of plan
the U.S. House of Representatives, and pollution control, Air pollution control, * * * * *
the Comptroller General of the United Incorporation by reference, Ozone. (e) * * *
EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
Applicable geographic State submittal/
Name of SIP provision EPA approval date Explanation
or nonattainment area effective date

* * * * * * *
Infrastructure and Interstate Statewide .................... 12/12/2007, 3/11/2008, 4/4/ 12/28/2011, 76 FR 81371 .... Approval for CAA elements 110(a)(2)(A),
Transport for the 1997 2008, 5/1/2008, 11/23/ (B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), and (M).
Ozone and the 1997 and 2009. Full approval for CAA elements
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.. 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii) and (J) with
approval of the GHG PSD revision (11/
10/2014, 79 FR66626). 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 element D(i)(I) approved 5/14/
2018, 83 FR 22208. 1997 ozone element
D(i)(I) approved 12/6/2018, [Insert Fed-
eral Register citation].

* * * * * * *

[FR Doc. 2018–26287 Filed 12–4–18; 8:45 am] complete state implementation plans control measures (BACM). For the 2012
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P (SIPs) required under the Clean Air Act annual PM2.5 NAAQS, California was
(CAA or ‘‘Act’’) to implement the 1997, required to submit by October 15, 2016,
2006, and 2012 national ambient air a SIP submission that meets the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION quality standards (NAAQS or requirements for Moderate PM2.5
AGENCY ‘‘standards’’) for fine particulate matter nonattainment areas, including the
(PM2.5) in the San Joaquin Valley. For requirement for reasonably available
40 CFR Part 52 the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 control measures (RACM). California
[EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0778; FRL–9987–38– NAAQS, California was required to submitted substantial portions of each
Region 9] submit by December 31, 2016, a SIP of these required SIP submissions as
submission that provides for, among part of an integrated plan on November
Findings of Failure To Submit other things, annual reductions in 16, 2018, but each of these submissions
Complete State Implementation Plans emissions of direct PM2.5 or a PM2.5 plan fails to meet the EPA’s minimum
Required for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 precursor pollutant within the area of criteria for completeness.
PM2.5 NAAQS; California; San Joaquin not less than five percent of the amount If the EPA has not affirmatively found
Valley of such emissions as reported in the that the State has submitted complete
khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES

AGENCY: Environmental Protection most recent inventory for the area. For SIPs that correct the deficiencies in each
Agency (EPA). the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, of these SIP submissions within 18
ACTION: Final rule. California was required to submit by months of this finding, the offset
August 21, 2017, a SIP submission that sanction will apply in the area. If within
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection meets the requirements for Serious 6 additional months the EPA still has
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including not affirmatively determined that the
find that California has failed to submit the requirement for best available State has submitted complete SIPs that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Dec 04, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday, December 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 62721

correct the deficiencies, the highway A. Statutory Requirements Valley.6 On October 6, 2016, after
funding sanction will apply in the area. B. Minimum Criteria for Completeness of considering public comments, the EPA
No later than 2 years after the EPA a SIP Submission denied California’s request for these
makes these findings, if the State has C. California’s SIP Submissions extensions of the attainment date.7
not submitted, and the EPA has not II. Consequences of Findings of Failure To
Consequently, on November 23, 2016,
Submit Complete SIPs
approved, each of the required SIP the EPA determined that the San
III. Final Action
submissions, the EPA must promulgate IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Joaquin Valley had failed to attain the
a federal implementation plan (FIP) to 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
address any remaining requirements. I. Background by the December 31, 2015 Serious Area
DATES: This action will be effective on A. Statutory Requirements attainment date.8 This determination
January 7, 2019. triggered a requirement for California to
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 1. 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS submit, by December 31, 2016, a revised
docket for this action under Docket ID PM2.5 attainment plan that satisfies the
The EPA first promulgated NAAQS requirements of CAA section 189(d).9
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0778. for PM2.5 on July 18, 1997, setting the
Generally, documents in the docket are The section 189(d) plan must, among
primary and secondary annual
listed and publicly available at http:// other things, demonstrate expeditious
standards at 15 micrograms per cubic
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
meter (mg/m3) and the primary and
the index, some information is not within the time period provided under
secondary 24-hour standards at 65 mg/
publicly available, i.e., Confidential CAA section 179(d) and provide for
m3.1 Effective April 5, 2005, the EPA
Business Information or other annual reductions in emissions of direct
designated the San Joaquin Valley as
information whose disclosure is PM2.5 or a PM2.5 plan precursor
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
restricted by statute. Certain other pollutant within the area of not less
NAAQS.2 Following a January 4, 2013
material, such as copyrighted material, than five percent per year from the most
decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
is not placed on the internet and will be recent emissions inventory for the area
the D.C. Circuit (‘‘D.C. Circuit’’)
publicly available in hard copy form. until attainment.10 The section 189(d)
remanding the EPA’s 2007 PM2.5
Publicly available docket materials are plan must also include, among other
Implementation Rule for the 1997 PM2.5
available either electronically at http:// things:
NAAQS,3 the EPA published a final rule
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
on June 2, 2014, classifying the San 1. A comprehensive, accurate, current
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
Joaquin Valley, among other areas, as a inventory of actual emissions from all
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. To
‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment area for the sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
inspect the hard copy materials, please
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4, the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
schedule an appointment during normal
part D of title I of the Act.4 2. plan provisions that require
business hours with the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Effective May 7, 2015, the EPA reasonable further progress (RFP) (CAA
section. reclassified the San Joaquin Valley as a 172(c)(2));
‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment area for the 3. quantitative milestones which are
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS.5 Upon to be achieved every 3 years until the
Wienke Tax, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
reclassification as a Serious Area, the area is redesignated attainment and
4192, tax.wienke@epa.gov.
San Joaquin Valley became subject to a which demonstrate RFP toward
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: December 31, 2015 deadline under CAA
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ attainment by the applicable date (CAA
section 188(c)(2) for attaining the 1997 section 189(c)); and
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. PM2.5 NAAQS. On February 9, 2016, the
Notice and Comment Under the EPA proposed to grant the State’s 4. contingency measures to be
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) request for extensions of the December implemented if the area fails to meet
31, 2015 attainment date under CAA RFP or to attain by the applicable
Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9)).
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an section 188(e), to December 31, 2018, for
agency for good cause finds that notice the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and to 2. 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
and public procedure are impracticable, December 31, 2020, for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised
unnecessary or contrary to the public
the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering
interest, the agency may issue a rule
1 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997) (codified at 40 CFR it from 65 mg/m3 to 35 mg/m3.11 Effective
without providing notice and an
50.7). December 14, 2009, the EPA designated
opportunity for public comment. The 2 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
the San Joaquin Valley as nonattainment
EPA has determined that there is good 3 Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The
cause for taking this final agency action F.3d. 428 (DC Cir. 2013) (‘‘NRDC’’). In NRDC, the
EPA initially classified the San Joaquin
without prior proposal and opportunity court held that the EPA erred in implementing the
1997 PM2.5 standards solely pursuant to the general Valley area as a Moderate Area effective
for comment because no significant EPA
implementation requirements of subpart 1, without July 2, 2014, and reclassified the area as
judgment is involved in making a also considering the requirements specific to
finding of failure to submit complete nonattainment areas for particles less than or equal 6 81 FR 6936. California’s request for extension of
SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by to 10 mm in diameter (PM10) in subpart 4, part D
of title I of the CAA. The court reasoned that the the Serious Area attainment date for the San
the CAA, where a state has made Joaquin Valley accompanied its Serious Area
plain meaning of the CAA requires implementation
incomplete submissions, to meet the of the 1997 PM2.5 standards under subpart 4 attainment plan for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and
khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES

requirement. Thus, notice and public because PM2.5 falls within the statutory definition related motor vehicle emission budgets, submitted
June 25, 2015 and August 13, 2015, respectively.
procedures are unnecessary. The EPA of PM10 and is thus subject to the same statutory
7 81 FR 69396.
finds that this constitutes good cause requirements as PM10. The court remanded the rule,
8 81 FR 84481.
without vacatur, and instructed the EPA ‘‘to
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). repromulgate these rules pursuant to Subpart 4 9 CAA section 189(d).

consistent with this opinion.’’ 10 Id. and 40 CFR 51.1010(c).
Table of Contents 4 79 FR 31566. 11 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006) (codified at 40

I. Background 5 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015). CFR 50.13).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Dec 04, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
62722 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday, December 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations

a Serious Area for the 2006 PM2.5 7. contingency measures to be RFP or to attain by the applicable
NAAQS effective February 19, 2016.12 implemented if the area fails to meet attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9));
Upon the area’s reclassification as a RFP or to attain by the applicable and
Serious Area for the 2006 PM2.5 attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9)); 8. Any revisions to the nonattainment
NAAQS, California was required to and NSR program necessary to implement
submit additional SIP revisions by 8. a revision to the nonattainment the requirements of CAA section
August 21, 2017, to satisfy the statutory NSR program to lower the applicable 189(a)(1)(A) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
requirements that apply to Serious PM2.5 ‘‘major stationary source’’ thresholds
B. Minimum Criteria for Completeness
nonattainment areas, including the from 100 tpy to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)). of a SIP Submission
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title
I of the Act.13 3. 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA
The Serious Area plan must include, On December 14, 2012, the EPA requires that the EPA promulgate
among other things: revised the primary annual PM2.5 minimum criteria that any plan
1. A comprehensive, accurate, current standard by lowering it from 15.0 to submission must meet before the EPA is
inventory of actual emissions from all 12.0 mg/m3.15 Effective April 15, 2015, required to act on such submission. The
sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the EPA designated and classified the EPA has promulgated these criteria at 40
San Joaquin Valley as a Moderate CFR part 51, appendix V. We refer to
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
nonattainment area for the 2012 annual these requirements as the
2. provisions for the implementation
PM2.5 NAAQS.16 This designation and ‘‘completeness criteria.’’ Section 2.1 of
of BACM, including best available
classification triggered a requirement for the completeness criteria requires that
control technology (BACT), for sources
California to submit a Moderate Area each plan submission include, among
of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 plan
plan addressing attainment of the 2012 other things: (1) Evidence that the State
precursors no later than 4 years after the
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin has adopted the plan in the State code
area is reclassified (CAA section Valley no later than 18 months after the
189(b)(1)(B)); or body of regulations, including the
designation, i.e., by October 15, 2016.17 date of adoption or final issuance as
3. a demonstration (including air quality The Moderate Area plan must well as the effective date of the plan, if
modeling) that the plan provides for include, among other things: different from the adoption/issuance
attainment as expeditiously as 1. A comprehensive, accurate, current date, and (2) evidence that the State
practicable but no later than December inventory of actual emissions from all followed all of the procedural
31, 2019, or where the State is seeking sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in requirements of the State’s laws and
an extension of the attainment date the area (CAA section 172(c)(3)); constitution in conducting and
under section 188(e), a demonstration 2. provisions for the implementation completing the adoption/issuance of the
that attainment by December 31, 2019, of RACM, including reasonably
plan. Section 2.2 of the completeness
is impracticable and that the plan available control technology (RACT), for
criteria requires that each plan
provides for attainment by the most sources of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5
submission contain certain technical
expeditious alternative date practicable plan precursors no later than 4 years
support, including (1) a demonstration
and no later than December 31, 2024, after designation (CAA section
that the SIP will protect RFP if
(CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(a)(1)(C));
3. a demonstration (including air approved, and (2) modeling to support
189(b)(1)(A)); 14 the proposed revision. The
quality modeling) that the plan provides
4. plan provisions that require RFP for attainment as expeditiously as completeness criteria also identify other
(CAA 172(c)(2)); practicable but no later than December administrative materials and technical
5. quantitative milestones which are 31, 2021, or a demonstration that support documentation that must be
to be achieved every 3 years until the attainment by that date is impracticable included in each plan submission.18
area is redesignated attainment and (CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)); Section 110(k)(2) of the CAA requires
which demonstrate RFP toward 4. plan provisions that require RFP the EPA to act on a SIP submission only
attainment by the applicable date (CAA (CAA 172(c)(2)); after the State has submitted a SIP
section 189(c)); 5. quantitative milestones which are submission (or part thereof) that meets
to be achieved every 3 years until the the completeness criteria, either by EPA
6. provisions to assure that control
area is redesignated attainment and determination or by operation of law
requirements applicable to major
which demonstrate RFP toward under CAA section 110(k)(1)(B).
stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to
major stationary sources of PM2.5 attainment by the applicable date (CAA C. California’s SIP Submissions
precursors, except where the state section 189(c));
6. provisions to assure that control On November 16, 2018, California
demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction submitted to the EPA a draft of the
that such sources do not contribute requirements applicable to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to ‘‘2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, and 2012
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed PM2.5 Standards’’ (‘‘2018 PM2.5 Plan’’), a
the standard in the area (CAA section major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors, except where the state comprehensive plan for attainment of
189(e)); the PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin
demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction
that such sources do not contribute Valley. This submission includes
12 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014), 81 FR 2993
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed substantial portions of a section 189(d)
(January 20, 2016), and 81 FR 42263 (June 29, 2016)
(correcting amendment). the standard in the area (CAA section plan addressing attainment of the 1997
189(e)); PM2.5 NAAQS, a Serious Area plan
khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES

13 Id.
14 A state seeking an extension of a Serious Area
7. contingency measures to be addressing attainment of the 2006 PM2.5
attainment date under section 188(e) must also meet implemented if the area fails to meet NAAQS, and a Moderate Area plan
additional requirements under that provision, addressing attainment of the 2012 PM2.5
including the requirement to demonstrate that the
SIP for the area includes the most stringent
15 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013) (codified at 40 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley. The
measures that are included in any SIP or are CFR 50.18).
16 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).
achieved in practice in any state, and can feasibly 18 See generally 40 CFR part 51, appendix V,

be implemented in the area. CAA section 188(e). 17 CAA section 189(a)(2)(B). sections 2.1 and 2.2.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Dec 04, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday, December 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 62723

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution thereof). Sections 179(a) and 110(c) of IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Control District adopted the 2018 PM2.5 the CAA establish specific Reviews
Plan on November 15, 2018. consequences for failure to submit
As a threshold matter, however, the A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
complete SIP submissions or SIP Planning and Executive Order 13563:
California Air Resources Board (CARB) elements required under part D of title
noted in its letter transmitting the SIP Improving Regulation and Regulatory
I of the Act, including the eventual Review
submission to the EPA that CARB had imposition of mandatory sanctions in
not yet presented the 2018 PM2.5 Plan to the affected area. This action is not a significant
its Board or adopted it for submission to regulatory action and was, therefore, not
the EPA as a revision to the California In accordance with the EPA’s submitted to the Office of Management
SIP. CARB stated that it was providing sanctions sequencing rule in 40 CFR and Budget (OMB) for review.
the submission to the EPA now so that 52.31, the offset sanction identified in
CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply in B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
EPA staff can begin its review while
the San Joaquin Valley area 18 months Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
CARB completes the final step in plan
after the effective date of these findings, Costs
development when it considers
approval of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan at its if the EPA has not affirmatively This action is not an Executive Order
hearing scheduled for January 24–25, determined by that date that the State 13771 regulatory action because this
2019.19 has submitted a complete SIP action is not significant under Executive
Accordingly, the EPA cannot at this addressing the deficiency that is the Order 12866.
time find that California has submitted basis for these findings. If, within 6 C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
the required complete PM2.5 SIP months after the offset sanction applies,
revisions for the San Joaquin Valley the EPA still has not affirmatively This action does not impose an
nonattainment area. CARB’s November information collection burden under the
determined that the State has submitted
16, 2018 SIP submission does not provisions of the PRA. This final rule
a complete SIP addressing the
include evidence that the State has does not establish any new information
deficiency that is the basis for the collection requirement apart from what
adopted the plan in the State code or findings, the highway funding sanction
body of regulations or evidence that the is already required by law. This rule
identified in CAA section 179(b)(1) relates to the requirements in the CAA
State followed all of the procedural
would also apply in the San Joaquin for states to submit SIPs under sections
requirements of the State’s laws and
Valley. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5), 172, 188 and 189 which address the
constitution in conducting and
neither sanction would apply if the EPA statutory requirements that apply to
completing the adoption/issuance of the
plan, as required by 40 CFR part 51, determines within 18 months after the areas designated as nonattainment for
appendix V, section 2.1. Based on these effective date of these findings that the the PM2.5 NAAQS.
deficiencies alone, the SIP submission State has submitted a complete SIP
submission addressing the deficiency D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
fails to meet the EPA’s minimum
completeness criteria. In addition, until that is the basis for these findings. I certify that this rule will not have a
we receive the formal SIP submission, Additionally, a finding of failure to significant economic impact on a
we cannot determine whether the plan submit a complete SIP submission substantial number of small entities
that CARB ultimately adopts will under the RFA. This action will not
triggers an obligation under CAA
contain all of the necessary components impose any requirements on small
section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate
of the required PM2.5 attainment plans entities. The rule is a finding that
a FIP no later than 2 years after the California has not submitted the
for the San Joaquin Valley and the finding, unless the state has submitted,
associated technical support required necessary SIP revisions.
and the EPA has approved, the required
for each submission under 40 CFR part SIP submittal. Thus, the EPA would be E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
51, appendix V, section 2.2. required to promulgate a PM2.5 FIP for 1995 (UMRA)
We note, however, that CARB’s
the San Joaquin Valley, in relevant part, This action does not contain any
submission represents a significant step
if California does not submit and the unfunded mandate as described in
in the State’s and District’s multi-year
effort to address the Act’s attainment EPA does not approve all of the UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
planning requirements for the PM2.5 necessary SIP submissions within 2 not significantly or uniquely affect small
NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley, and years after the effective date of these governments. The action imposes no
we commit to continue working closely findings. enforceable duty on any state, local or
with both agencies as they implement tribal governments or the private sector.
III. Final Action
and enforce the requirements of these F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
plans going forward. The EPA is finding that California has
This action does not have federalism
failed to submit complete SIP revisions
II. Consequences of Findings of Failure implications. It will not have substantial
To Submit Complete SIPs for implementation of the 1997, 2006, direct effects on the states, on the
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the San relationship between the national
Under section 110(k)(1)(C) of the Act, Joaquin Valley as required under
where the EPA determines that a SIP government and the states, or on the
subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the distribution of power and
submission (or part thereof) does not CAA and the PM2.5 SIP Requirements
meet the EPA’s minimum completeness responsibilities among the various
khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES

Rule. The consequences of these levels of government.
criteria established in 40 CFR part 51,
findings are discussed above in section
appendix V, the state shall be treated as G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
II of this notice.
not having made the submission (or part and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
19 Letter dated November 16, 2018, from Kurt

Karperos, Deputy Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike This action does not have tribal
Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. implications as specified in Executive

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Dec 04, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
62724 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday, December 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations

Order 13175. This rule finds that directly affect the level of protection ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
California has failed to submit SIP provided to human health or the AGENCY
revisions that satisfy certain environment.
nonattainment area planning 40 CFR Part 180
requirements under sections 172, 188 L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0372; FRL–9985–83]
and 189 of the CAA for the 1997, 2006, The Congressional Review Act, 5
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for the San U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Clomazone; Pesticide Tolerances
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. No
Business Regulatory Enforcement AGENCY: Environmental Protection
tribe is subject to the requirement to
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Agency (EPA).
submit an implementation plan under
that before a rule may take effect, the ACTION: Final rule.
section 172 or under subpart 4 of part
D of Title I of the CAA. Thus, Executive agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
Order 13175 does not apply to this tolerances for residues of clomazone in
action. copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General or on multiple commodities which are
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of of the United States. The EPA will identified and discussed later in this
Children From Environmental Health submit a report containing this action document. Interregional Research
and Safety Risks and other required information to the Project No. 4 (IR–4) requested these
The EPA interprets Executive Order tolerances under the Federal Food,
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
13045 as applying only to those Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
Representatives, and the Comptroller
regulatory actions that concern health or DATES: This regulation is effective
General of the United States prior to
safety risks that the EPA has reason to December 6, 2018. Objections and
publication of the rule in the Federal
believe may disproportionately affect requests for hearings must be received
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
children, per the definition of ‘‘covered on or before February 4, 2019, and must
until 60 days after it is published in the
regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of be filed in accordance with the
Federal Register. This action is not a instructions provided in 40 CFR part
the Executive Order. This action is not ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
subject to Executive Order 13045 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
804(2). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
because it is a finding that California
has failed to submit certain SIP M. Judicial Review ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
revisions that satisfy the nonattainment identified by docket identification (ID)
area planning requirements under Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0372, is
sections 172, 188 and 189 of the CAA Air Act, petitions for judicial review of available at http://www.regulations.gov
for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 this action must be filed in the United or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley States Court of Appeals for the Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
nonattainment area and does not appropriate circuit by February 4, 2019. in the Environmental Protection Agency
directly or disproportionately affect Filing a petition for reconsideration by Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
children. the Administrator of this final rule does Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
not affect the finality of this action for Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
the purposes of judicial review nor does
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Distribution or Use it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed, Monday through Friday, excluding legal
This action is not subject to Executive and shall not postpone the effectiveness holidays. The telephone number for the
Order 13211, because it is not a of such rule or action. This action may Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
significant regulatory action under not be challenged later in proceedings to and the telephone number for the OPP
Executive Order 12866. Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
enforce its requirements (see section
J. National Technology Transfer and the visitor instructions and additional
307(b)(2)).
Advancement Act information about the docket available
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
This rulemaking does not involve FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
technical standards. Environmental protection, Michael Goodis, Registration Division
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Administrative practice and procedures, (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Actions To Address Environmental Air pollution control, Approval and Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Justice in Minority Populations and promulgation of implementation plans, Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
Low-Income Populations Administrative practice and procedures, 20460–0001; main telephone number:
Incorporation by reference, (703) 305–7090; email address:
The EPA believes the human health or Intergovernmental relations, Particulate
environmental risk addressed by this RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
matter, and Reporting and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
action will not have potential
recordkeeping requirements.
disproportionately high and adverse I. General Information
human health or environmental effects Dated: November 19, 2018.
on minority, low-income, or indigenous Deborah Jordan, A. Does this action apply to me?
populations. In finding that California Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. You may be potentially affected by
khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES

has failed to submit SIP revisions that [FR Doc. 2018–26359 Filed 12–4–18; 8:45 am] this action if you are an agricultural
satisfy certain nonattainment area producer, food manufacturer, or
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
planning requirements under sections pesticide manufacturer. The following
172, 188 and 189 of the CAA for list of North American Industrial
the1997, 2006, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Classification System (NAICS) codes is
for the San Joaquin Valley not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
nonattainment area, this action does not provides a guide to help readers

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Dec 04, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM 06DER1
Document Created: 2018-12-05 02:35:50
Document Modified: 2018-12-05 02:35:50
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This action will be effective on January 7, 2019.
Contact		Wienke Tax, EPA Region IX, (415) 947- 4192, [email protected]
FR Citation		83 FR 62720
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Administrative Practice and Procedures; Air Pollution Control; Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Particulate Matter and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements